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

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 8:30:22 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,

Cherie Short

Edmond, OK 73025
Exhibit 32
                                   ----------



                      CEO AND CFO 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  Quarterly  Report  of  ITEC  Attractions,  Inc.  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Paul M.
Bluto,  Chief  Executive  Officer and Chief  Financial  Officer of the  Company,
certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

         (1)  The Report fully complies with the  requirements  of section 13(a)
              or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

         (2)  The information  contained in the Report fairly  presents,  in all
              material   respects,   the  financial   condition  and  result  of
              operations of the Company.


/s/  Paul M. Bluto
------------------
Paul M. Bluto
Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial Officer
August 14, 2003
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

ORDER GRANTING STIPULATED DEFENSE 

MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL DATE 1

U.S. v. Nathan Miller; CR05-5377FDB

FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER

1331 Broadway, Ste. 400

Tacoma, Washington 98402

(253) 593-6710

JUDGE FRANKLIN D. BURGESS 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs.

NATHAN MILLER,

Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

NO. CR05-5733FDB

ORDER GRANTING STIPULATED

DEFENSE MOTION TO CONTINUE

TRIAL DATE 

Based on the stipulated defense motion to continue the trial date, and the affidavit

of defense counsel in support of the motion, the Court makes the following findings of

fact and conclusions of law:

1. The ends of justice served by granting this continuance outweigh the best

interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial. 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A). 

2. Proceeding to trial absent adequate time for the defense to prepare would

result in a miscarriage of justice. 18 U.S.C. §3161(h)(8)(B)(I). 

3. The defense needs additional time to explore issues of some complexity,

including all relevant issues and defenses applicable to the case, which would make it

unreasonable to expect adequate preparation for pretrial proceedings or for trial itself

within the time limits established by the Speedy Trial Act and currently set for this case. 

18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B(ii). 

Case 3:05-cr-05733-RBL Document 25 Filed 02/10/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

ORDER GRANTING STIPULATED DEFENSE 

MOTION TO CONTINUE TRIAL DATE 2

U.S. v. Nathan Miller; CR05-5377FDB

FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER

1331 Broadway, Ste. 400

Tacoma, Washington 98402

(253) 593-6710

4. Taking into account the exercise of due diligence, a continuance is necessary

to allow the defendant the reasonable time for effective preparation his defense. 18

U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(iv). 

NOW, THEREFORE,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the trial date is continued from March 6, 2006 to

June 12, 2006, at 9:00 am. The resulting period of delay from March 6, 2006, up to and

including the new trial date of June 12, 2006, is hereby excluded for speedy trial

purposes under 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(A) and (B).

Pre-trial motions are due no later than March 6, 2006.

Pre-trial conference shall be on May 25, 2006, at 2:00 pm.

DONE this 10th day of February, 2006.

A

JUDGE FRANKLIN D. BURGESS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Presented By:

/s/ Russell V. Leonard /s/ Gregory Gruber 

 

Russell V. Leonard Gregory Gruber 

Attorney for Defendant Assistant United States Attorney

Case 3:05-cr-05733-RBL Document 25 Filed 02/10/06 Page 2 of 2
Case No. 8,831.

#### McIVER v. MOORE.

[1 Cranch, C. C. 90.] 1

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

April Term, 1802.

Pleading at Law —Nil debet — Act op Limitations — Bankruptcy—Assignment—Authority to Sue — Nonsuit—Justice op Case.

The act of limitations can not be given in evidence upon nil debet. The plaintiff being as-signee of a bankrupt, must produce the commission and proceedings and deed of assignment. Upon reinstatement of the cause after nonsuit, the court will not permit the defendant to plead limitation, unless on affidavit showing it to be necessary for the justice of the case.

Debt on an accepted order. Nil debet and issue.

E. J. Lee, for defendant,

prayed the court to instruct the jury that the acceptance of the order not being dated, and the order being dated September 21th, 1794, and no proof being given of the date of the acceptance, they ought to presume that the acceptance was on the day of the date of the order, and therefore barred by the act of limitations; the writ not being issued until the 5th of September, 1801.

CRANCH, Circuit Judge,

inquired whether the act of limitations was pleaded.

E. J. Lee contended that it might be given in evidence on the issue of nil debet, and cited Esp. N. P. 262.

THE COURT said they had decided at last term in Washington, in the case of Gardner v. Lindo [Case No. 5,231], — see that case in the supreme court of the United States, 1 Cranch [5 U. S.] 343, — that the statute of limitations could not be given in evidence on the plea of nil debet to an action of debt on a promissory note; and refused to overrule that decision, it having been made unanimously by a full court; and the court being now not full.

MARSHALL, Circuit Justice, absent

Upon the motion of E. J. Lee, for defendant THE COURT instructed the jury that the plaintiff [the assignee of E. C. Dick] must prove himself to be duly appointed as-signee, by producing the original commission, and proceedings thereon, or a certified copy thereof, and the original deed of assignment.

The plaintiff became nonsuit, and THE COURT, on his motion, reinstated the cause without costs, and refused the defendant leave to plead the statute of limitations, unless he could show by affidavits that the plea was necessary to the justice of the case.
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

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

AMANDA MILJUS,

Plaintiff,

v.

JO ANNE B. BARNHART, Commissioner of

Social Security

Defendant.

Case No. C06-5009RBL-KLS

ORDER DISMISSING

COMPLAINT

The Court, having reviewed the complaint, the Report and Recommendation of Judge Karen L.

Strombom, United States Magistrate Judge, and the remaining record, does hereby find and Order:

(1) the Court adopts the Report and Recommendation;

(2) plaintiff’s complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice; and

(3) the Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to counsel for plaintiff and to Magistrate

Judge Karen L. Strombom.

DATED this 17th day of August, 2006.

ARONALD B. LEIGHTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-05009-RBL Document 6 Filed 08/17/06 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 32.2

DIGIMARC CORPORATION

CERTIFICATION

In connection with the Annual Report of Digimarc Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 24, 2010 and as amended by the Companys Amendment No. 1 to Form 10-K as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Michael McConnell, Chief Financial 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: August 6, 2010



|    |  |                        
|--- |  | -----------------------
|By: |  | /s/ MICHAEL MCCONNELL  
|    |  | Michael McConnell      
|    |  | Chief Financial Officer
EX-4.5



 Exhibit 4.5 

SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT JOINT SHARE EXCHANGE AGREEMENT 

PREAMBLE 
 This
Supplemental Agreement (this “Agreement”) to Joint Share Exchange Agreement (as defined below) is entered into on December 14, 2017 (the “Execution Date”) by and between: 

 

	(1)	Advanced Semiconductor Engineering, Inc. (“ASE”), a company incorporated under Republic of China (“ROC”) laws, with its address at No. 26, Chin Third Road, Nantze Export Processing
Zone, Nantze District, Kaohsiung City, Taiwan; and 

  

	(2)	Siliconware Precision Industries Co., Ltd. (“SPIL”), a company incorporated under ROC laws, with its address at No. 123, Section 3, Da Fong Road, Tantzu District, Taichung City, Taiwan.


 WHEREAS ASE and SPIL (collectively, the “Parties”) have entered into the Joint Share Exchange Agreement (the
“Joint Share Exchange Agreement”) on June 30, 2016 whereby ASE will file an application to establish a holding company (“HoldCo”) by means of a statutory share exchange, and HoldCo will acquire all issued and
outstanding shares of both ASE and SPIL. After the closing of the share exchange, ASE and SPIL will become wholly-owned subsidiaries of HoldCo concurrently (the “Transaction” or “Share Exchange”). 

NOW THEREFORE, IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have entered into this Agreement for the purpose of completing the Transaction, as follows: 

 

	1.	LONG STOP DATE  

  

	1.1	Both Parties agree to amend the definition of Long Stop Date (the “Long Stop Date”) as set forth in the Joint Share Exchange Agreement to read as follows: 


 

	  	Long Stop Date refers to October 31, 2018 or a later date otherwise agreed in writing by both Parties. 

  

	2.	OTHER AGREEMENTS 

  

	2.1	This Agreement shall be deemed to be part of the Joint Share Exchange Agreement, provided that the terms of this Agreement shall prevail in case of discrepancy between this Agreement and the Joint Share Exchange
Agreement. The Joint Share Exchange Agreement shall be applicable to matters not covered herein. Capitalized terms undefined herein shall have the meaning ascribed to them in the Joint Share Exchange Agreement. 


 

	2.2	The interpretations, effectiveness and performance of this Agreement shall be governed by ROC law. Any matter not covered herein shall be addressed in accordance with Joint Share Exchange Agreement and relevant laws and
regulations. 

  

	2.3	Pursuant to Article 17.3 of Joint Share Exchange Agreement, this Agreement shall become effective after it is signed and delivered by both Parties and upon approval by their respective board of directors.


  

	3.4	This Agreement is made in duplicate originals, one to be retained by each Party. 

 [Remainder
of This Page Intentionally Left Blank, Signature Page Follows] 







 Parties 
  

			
	 ADVANCED SEMICONDUCTOR ENGINEERING, INC.
  
	  	SILICONWARE PRECISION INDUSTRIES CO., LTD.
	 /s/ Jason C.S. Chang
	  	 /s/ Bough Lin

	REPRESENTATIVE: JASON C.S. CHANG	  	REPRESENTATIVE: BOUGH LIN
[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: Geologyand mineral resources of the Solomon and Casadepaga quadrangles, SewardPeninsula, Alaska**
 
Report | Plates: 03040607
 
SuDoc Number: I19.3:433
Item Number:0620 (online)
CGP systemNumber: 000958974
 
August 1, 2018
Memorandum 

U.s. Department of 

Transportation 

Office of the Secretary 

of Transportation 

Subject: Essential Air Service at Glasgow, Glendive, Havre, 

Lewistown, Miles City, Sidney, and Wolf Point, Montana 

(Docket No. DOT-OST-1997-2605) 

From:i~~;J.i~d~fChi~ ~'Y3~ EAS & Domestic Analysis Division, X-53 

To: Dockets Operations, M-30 

Date: December 30,2010 

Reply to Brian Swanson, 

Attn. of: X-53 Ext. 65392 

The Montana Department of Transportation, Aeronautics Division, with support of the 

seven communities noted above, has requested an extension, from January 5, 2011, until 

January 17, 2011, to evaluate the Essential Air Service proposals received in response to 

Order 2010-11-6. 

This is to advise all parties that we have decided to grant the requested extension to 

submit recommendations and comments. January 17th is a federal holiday; therefore, all 

community comments must be received by no later than January 18,2011. 
Swanson, Brian (OST) 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Subject: 

Alke, Debbie [dalke@mt.gov] 

Wednesday, December 29,20103:26 PM 

Devany, Dennis (OST); Swanson, Brian (OST) 

comment period 

As discussed during the telecon this morning the Montana Essential Air Service Task Force is requesting an extension to 

the comment period for Order 2010-11-6 to COB on Monday, January 17, 2011. 

Thank you. 

Debbie 

1
IV 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 589 

Directing the Committee on the Judiciary to investigate whether Alberto 

R. Gonzales, Attorney General of the United States, should be impeached 

for high crimes and misdemeanors. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 31, 2007 

Mr. INSLEE (for himself, Mr. BECERRA, Mr. UDALL of New Mexico, Mr. 

CHANDLER, Mr. MOORE of Kansas, Mr. ARCURI, Mr. BRALEY of Iowa, 

Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia, Mr. COHEN, Mr. BLUMENAUER, Mr. DEFAZIO, 

Ms. HOOLEY, Mr. WU, Ms. CLARKE, Ms. MCCOLLUM of Minnesota, and 

Mr. ELLISON) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 

the Committee on Rules 

RESOLUTION 

Directing the Committee on the Judiciary to investigate 

whether Alberto R. Gonzales, Attorney General of the 

United States, should be impeached for high crimes and 

misdemeanors. 

1 Resolved, That the Committee on the Judiciary shall 

2 investigate fully whether sufficient grounds exist for the 

3 House of Representatives to impeach Alberto R. Gonzales, 

4 Attorney General of the United States, for high crimes 

5 and misdemeanors. 

Æ 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with BILLS
No. 61057.

protests 261258-K, etc. (New York).

#### Charles Garcia & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of monofilament fishing lines the same in all material respects as those the subject of Abstract 60183, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-13-00250-CV

Michael E. Geiger

v.

Eric Milburn, Sherilyn Trent, Tammi 

Messimer, Eddie Williams, Emilo 

Barrentes, David Green, Karen 

Aniston, John Rupert, and Major 

Harris III

§

§

§

§

From the 78th District Court

of Wichita County (178,685-B)

February 6, 2014

Per Curiam

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that 

there was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of 

the trial court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

PER CURIAM
No. P67/96.

#### Morris Friedman et al. *v.*United States,

protests 61/6615, etc. (Philadelphia).

Rao, C.J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of bags or baskets in chief value of rush similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Carson M. Simon & Co.*v. *United States*(55 Cust. Ct. 103, C.D. 2558), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
No. 57729.

protests 191129-K and 191130-K (Philadelphia).

#### J. A. Dougherty’s Sons, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

For the reasons stated in *Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc. v. United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C. D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
No. 58245.

protests 207801-K, etc. (Los Angeles).

#### Acrow, Incorporated, and Frank P. Dow Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that certain items of the merchandise consist of building shores the same in all material respects as those involved in Abstract 57727, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
Exhibit





Exhibit 10.54



[LETTERHEAD OF SEARS HOLDINGS CORPORATION]




August 15, 2016 



Perry Schwartz
Vice President, Tools and Lawn & Garden




Dear Dean,


In recognition of your past and future contributions to the Company, and as a critical member of the Tools Business Unit, we are pleased to provide you with the following changes to your compensation.  Effective August 1, 2016, the key elements to your compensation will be:  


		
	•
	Annual base salary will increase to $350,000; 



		
	•
	Annual incentive opportunity under SHC’s Annual Incentive Plan will increase to 75% of your base salary;  



		
	•
	Participation under SHC’s Long Term Incentive Program will increase to 75% of your base salary.   



Additionally, the enclosed Executive Severance Agreement (“Agreement”), the Agreement provides consideration of twelve (12) months of salary continuation, subject to mitigation, upon, for example, involuntary termination without Cause as defined therein.  In addition, the Agreement includes non-disclosure, non-solicitation and a limited non-compete that apply following termination of employment and regardless of whether you receive severance benefits under this Agreement.  These provisions are detailed in the Agreement, which you should review thoroughly.  This Agreement would supersede your current Agreement which provides for six (6) months of salary continuation.


To acknowledge and accept these changes, please sign and date below and return this letter and the Agreement to your manager.  




Accepted:


___/s/ Perry Schwartz________________        _10_/_17_/_16_
Perry Schwartz                                                                        Date 




Business Unit Leader:


__/s/ Tiffany Morris__________________        _8_/_17_/_16_
Tiffany Morris                                                           Date


Enclosures
No. P67/293.

#### Ross Products, Inc. *v.*United States, protest 64/9019 (New York).

Watson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protest consists of plastic foam dish mops the same in all material respects as those the subject of *Ross*Products, *Inc.*v. *United States*(45 Cust. Ct. 290, Abstract 64603), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.