alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
From: christinamc51@aol.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:59:02 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

Remember! there is no justice for anyone apart from the laws of God. From whence does the "concept"

of justice come? God, not mankind. Only God is just and only by following God's laws are we then

just. It is not just to coerce one to go against one's conscience. Please read on ....

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,

Christina McCarthy

Milford, OH 45150
No. 57017.

protest 187391-K (New York).

#### A. & M. Karagheusian, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

At the trial it was stipulated that the facts and issues herein are similar to those involved in *United States*v. *Browne Vintners Co., Inc.*(34 C. C. P. A. 112, C. A. D. 351) and that the quantities reported by the inspector as manifested, not found, were not in fact received by the importer. In accordance with stipulation of counsel and following the decision cited it was held that the two bales of scoured carpet wool reported by the inspector as manifested, not found, are subject to an allowance in duties. The protest was sustained to this extent.
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

ORDER DISMISSING § 2254 PETITION – 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

NATHAN LORING,

Petitioner, 

v.

ALICE PAYNE,

Respondent.

____________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. C05-1599-RAJ

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

The Court, after careful consideration of petitioner’s § 2254 petition for writ of habeas

corpus, the answer of the respondent, all supplemental materials filed, the Report and

Recommendation of the Honorable James P. Donohue, United States Magistrate Judge, the

governing authorities, and the balance of the record, does hereby find and ORDER:

(1) The Court adopts the Report and Recommendation, except that it modifies the

fourth sentence of the first paragraph on page 6 of the Report and

Recommendation to read as follows: “Because petitioner did not file his PRP

raising his first and fourth claims within one year of this date, such claims are

procedurally barred in this federal habeas action.” This modification does not

change the substance of the Report and Recommendation.

(2) Petitioner’s federal habeas petition (Dkt. No. 4) is DENIED and the abovecaptioned case is DISMISSED with prejudice.

Case 2:05-cv-01599-RAJ Document 35 Filed 04/23/08 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

ORDER DISMISSING § 2254 PETITION – 2

(3) The Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to all counsel of record and to

Judge Donohue.

DATED this 23rd day of April, 2008.

AThe Honorable Richard A. Jones

United States District Judge 

Case 2:05-cv-01599-RAJ Document 35 Filed 04/23/08 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit






Exhibit 10.1
ADDENDUM TO A CHANGE IN CONTROL AGREEMENT


THIS ADDENDUM TO A CHANGE IN CONTROL AGREEMENT (this “Addendum”) is executed as of March 15, 2018 by and among Aspen Insurance Holdings Limited, a Bermuda corporation (“Holdings”), Aspen Insurance UK Services Limited, an England corporation (“AUKSL”) and Charles Christopher O’Kane (the “Executive”).
WHEREAS Holdings, AUKSL and the Executive entered into a Change in Control Agreement dated February 23, 2015 (the “Change in Control Agreement”);
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
		
	1.
	Defined terms in this Addendum which are not otherwise defined shall carry the meanings attributed to them in the Change in Control Agreement.




		
	2.
	Clause 6(a)(i)(B) of the Change in Control Agreement shall be deleted and replaced with the following:




		
	“(B)
	The amount equal to the product of (1) three and (2) the sum of (x) the Executive’s Annual Base Salary and (y) the Recent Average Bonus”


		
	3.
	All other provisions of the Change in Control Agreement shall remain in full force and effect.




		
	4.
	This Addendum shall be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of England & Wales.











IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Addendum as of the day and year first written above.


ASPEN INSURANCE HOLDINGS LIMITED
By: /s/ Michael Cain
Name: Michael Cain
Title: Group General Counsel


ASPEN INSURANCE UK SERVICES LIMITED


By: /s/Michael Cain
Name: Michael Cain
Title: Director
        
CHARLES CHRISTOPHER O’KANE


/s/ Charles Christopher O’Kane 
Charles Christopher O’Kane
EXHIBIT 10.2
                                                                  ------------

                        EXECUTIVE EMPLOYMENT DESCRIPTION
                        --------------------------------


RONALD E. CLARK
---------------

The Company, pursuant to an employment arrangement, hired Mr. Clarke as Senior
Vice President of Operations on September 1, 2001, subject to a 90 day
probationary period, for an annual salary of $115,000, with a salary review on
January 1, 2002, which salary, subject to satisfactory performance, will be
increased in an amount not less than $10,000.  In connection with his
employment arrangement, Mr. Clarke is to receive, subject to satisfactory
performance during the time periods described below, restricted common stock
in accordance with the following schedule:

                             Period           Shares
                      --------------------    ------
                      09/01/01 to 03/31/02    40,000
                      04/01/02 to 09/30/02    40,000
                      10/01/02 to 03/31/03    40,000
                      04/01/03 to 09/30/03    40,000
                      10/01/03 to 03/31/04    40,000
                      04/01/04 to 09/30/04    40,000



























                                    Page 35
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                         4,231
<SECURITIES>                                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  7,532
<ALLOWANCES>                                     295
<INVENTORY>                                       48
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              11,958
<PP&E>                                         2,342
<DEPRECIATION>                                 1,620
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                20,678
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          6,931
<BONDS>                                            0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              0
<PREFERRED>                                        0
<COMMON>                                         548
<OTHER-SE>                                     8,738
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  20,678 
<SALES>                                        4,863
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               4,863
<CGS>                                          1,412
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  4,091
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  13
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               156
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  661
<INCOME-TAX>                                      38
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              623 
<DISCONTINUED>                                     0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    0
<CHANGES>                                          0
<NET-INCOME>                                     623
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    .10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    .10
        


</TABLE>
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. 

JOSHUA BINDER,

Defendant. ____________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. CR06-0041-RSL-JPD

DETENTION ORDER 

Offenses charged:

Count 1: Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization (RICO) in violation of 18

U.S.C. § 1962(c).

Count 2: Conspiracy to Commit RICO in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d).

Count 3: Violent Crime in Aid of Racketeering — Conspiracy to Murder Michael

Walsh in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(5).

Count 4: Violent Crime in Aid of Racketeering — Murder of Michael Walsh in violation

of 18 U.S.C. § 1959(a)(1).

Count 11: Interference with Commerce by Threats or Violence in violation of 18 U.S.C.

§§ 1951(a) and (b).

Date of Detention Hearing: February 17, 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

the following:

Case 2:06-cr-00041-RSL Document 27 Filed 02/21/06 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

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DETENTION

(1) Defendant is facing the possibility of a penalty of death or life in prison on the

instant charges which involve crimes of extreme violence.

(2) Defendant is alleged to have made serious threats against witnesses to previous

crimes charged against defendant. The fear experienced by the witnesses has allegedly caused

the witnesses to withdraw cooperation and the charges to be dismissed.

(3) There appear to be no conditions or combination of conditions other than

detention that will reasonably address the danger to other persons or the community.

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

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 21st day of February, 2006.

AJAMES P. DONOHUE

United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 2:06-cr-00041-RSL Document 27 Filed 02/21/06 Page 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 744 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 744

 Recognizing the contributions of Native American veterans and calling 
  upon the President to issue a proclamation urging the people of the 
  United States to observe a day in honor of Native American veterans.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 15, 2007

    Mrs. Wilson of New Mexico (for herself and Ms. Herseth Sandlin) 
submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee 
                          on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Recognizing the contributions of Native American veterans and calling 
  upon the President to issue a proclamation urging the people of the 
  United States to observe a day in honor of Native American veterans.

Whereas there are 195,871 Native American veterans in the United States;
Whereas Native Americans have participated for over 200 years in United States 
        military actions;
Whereas the participation of Native Americans in the War of 1812, the Civil War, 
        and the Spanish-America War was significant;
Whereas in World War I, it is estimated that more than 12,000 Native Americans 
        served the United States Armed Forces;
Whereas more than 44,000 Native Americans served in the Armed Forces during 
        World War II, in both the European and Pacific fronts, representing a 
        substantial portion of the 350,000 Native Americans then living in the 
        United States;
Whereas Native Americans fought in the Korean conflict, and more than 42,000 
        Native Americans fought in the Vietnam War, 90 percent of whom served as 
        volunteers;
Whereas Native Americans also provided significant contributions in the military 
        operations in Grenada and Panama and the Persian Gulf War in 1980s and 
        1990s; and
Whereas Native Americans should also be recognized for their participation in 
        Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom: Now, therefore, 
        be it--
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) recognizes all Native American veterans who have served 
        the Nation with honor, pride, devotion, wisdom and strength for 
        serving their country and protecting their homeland; and
            (2) calls upon the President to issue a proclamation urging 
        the people of the United States to observe a day honoring 
        Native American veterans with appropriate ceremonies and 
        activities.
                                 <all>
```
No. 58711.

protests 236115-K (A) and 236115-K (B) (New York).

#### Deuwahl Trading Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

An examination of the papers not disclosing anything that would tend in any way to overcome the presumption of correctness attaching to the decision of the collector, the protests were overruled.
H. Res. 568 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

July 30, 2007. 

Whereas 476 members of the 1st Battalion, 133rd Infantry 

of the Iowa National Guard were mobilized for active 

duty in September and October of 2005; 

Whereas 80 members of the 1st Battalion, 133rd Infantry 

have been providing essential support to the Battalion 

from Iowa National Guard installations in Waterloo, 

Iowa, and Dubuque, Iowa, and at least 490 members of 

the 1st Battalion, 133rd Infantry were deployed to Iraq 

in April and May of 2006; 

Whereas the members of the 1st Battalion, 133rd Infantry 

have been serving bravely and honorably since those 

dates in the al-Anbar Province of Iraq, one of the most 

dangerous parts of the country; 

Whereas the 1st Battalion, 133rd Infantry deployed as part 

of the 1st Brigade Combat Team of the 34th Infantry 

Division, which has completed the longest continuous deployment of any Army National Guard unit during Operation Iraqi Freedom; 

Whereas the 1st Battalion, 133rd Infantry is the longestserving Iowa Army National Guard unit since World War 

II; 
2 

•HRES 568 EH 

Whereas the CBS program ‘‘60 Minutes’’ devoted an entire 

hour to telling the story of the 1st Battalion, 133rd Infantry on May 27, 2007; 

Whereas the members of the 1st Battalion, 133rd Infantry 

have completed over 500 missions providing security for 

convoys operating in the al-Anbar Province; 

Whereas the members of the 1st Battalion, 133rd Infantry 

have logged over 4 million mission miles, and have delivered over one-third of the fuel needed to sustain coalition 

forces in Iraq; 

Whereas the members of the 1st Battalion, 133rd Infantry 

have detained over 60 insurgents; 

Whereas the members of the 1st Battalion, 133rd Infantry 

were scheduled to return home in April 2007, but had 

their tours of duty extended until July 2007; 

Whereas the members of the 1st Battalion, 133rd Infantry 

left behind civilian jobs, friends, and families in order to 

serve the United States; 

Whereas 1st Battalion, 133rd Infantry members Sergeant 1st 

Class Scott E. Nisely and Sergeant Kampha B. 

Sourivong gave the ultimate sacrifice for their country 

when they were tragically killed during combat operations 

near Al Asad, Iraq, on September 30, 2006; and 

Whereas the United States will be forever indebted to the soldiers and families of the 1st Battalion, 133rd Infantry 

for their sacrifices and their contributions to the United 

States mission in Iraq: Now, therefore, be it 

Resolved, That the House of Representatives honors and 

expresses gratitude for the service and sacrifices of the members and families of the 1st Battalion of the 133rd Infantry 
3 

•HRES 568 EH 

of the Iowa National Guard upon their return home from 

their deployment in Iraq. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
No. 66083.

#### Excelsior Pearl Works, Inc., and Chas. H. Asche & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 60/5962 and 60/2848 (New York).

Opinion by

Donlon, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of manufactures of shell similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Charles A. Redden, Inc., et al.*v. *United States*(44 Cust. Ct. 241, C.D. 2181), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Each of the undersigned hereby certifies, in his capacity as an officer of
PeopleSoft, Inc. (the "Company"), for purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that based on
his knowledge:

      -     the Amendment No. 1 on Form 10-Q/A to the Quarterly Report of the
            Company on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2004 fully
            complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities
            Exchange Act of 1934; and

      -     the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operation
            of the Company.

Dated:  November 11, 2004

/s/ David A. Duffield
--------------------------------
David A. Duffield
Chief Executive Officer
PeopleSoft, Inc.

/s/ Kevin T. Parker
-------------------------------
Kevin T. Parker
Co-President and Chief Financial Officer
PeopleSoft, Inc.
III

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. CON. RES. 54

Expressing the sense of Congress that the United States Postal Service

should maintain the postal uniform allowance program.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

OCTOBER 21, 1997

Mr. DEWINE submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was

referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of Congress that the United States

Postal Service should maintain the postal uniform allowance program.

Whereas the United States Postal Service has successfully

supplied uniforms to its employees for 42 years under the

postal uniform allowance program;

Whereas the postal uniform allowance program currently provides business to more than 1,000 American companies

throughout the United States which, in turn, employ

more than 10,000 American workers;

Whereas the United States Postal Service has proposed a

new, centralized uniform procurement system that would

result in substantial loss of business to those American

companies and turn over control of the procurement system to a single vendor; and
2

•SCON 54 IS

Whereas the United States Postal Service has, in recent

years, become more profitable while continuing to use the

postal uniform allowance program: Now therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives

2 concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that the

3 United States Postal Service should maintain its current

4 postal uniform allowance program and make necessary

5 changes to improve that program, rather than implement

6 a centralized, single-vendor program.

Æ
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 - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

GERI P. ROLLER,

Plaintiff,

v.

JO ANNE BARNHART, Commissioner of

Social Security,

Defendant.

Case No. C06-5052 FDB

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND

RECOMMENDATION TO REVERSE THE

DECISION OF THE COMMISSIONER AND

REMAND FOR AN AWARD OF BENEFITS

This matter comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate

Judge that the decision of the Commissioner determining Ms Roller to not be disabled be reversed

and the matter be remanded to the Commissioner for an award of benefits. The Commissioner has

not filed objections to the Report and Recommendation.

The Court, having reviewed Plaintiff’s complaint, the Report and Recommendation, and the

remaining record, does hereby find and ORDER:

(1) The Court adopts the Report and Recommendation;

(2) The Administrative Law Judge erred in determining Plaintiff to be not disabled;

(3) The decision is reversed and the matter remanded for an award of benefits; and

(4) The Clerk is directed to send copies of this Order to Plaintiff’s counsel, Defendant’s

Case 3:06-cv-05052-FDB Document 24 Filed 09/19/06 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 - 2

counsel and Magistrate Karen L. Strombom.

DATED this 18th day of September, 2006.

AFRANKLIN D. BURGESS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-05052-FDB Document 24 Filed 09/19/06 Page 2 of 2