alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
From: Kerry Daly

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: RIN 1210-AB44 Mandatory Birth Control

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 8:02:47 PM

To Whom it May Concern,

I object in the strongest of terms to mandating birth control with no co-pays under

the so-called Affordable Care Act.

Birth control is already widely available to all women, subsidized largely by

taxpayers. Demanding that we further subsidize other people's birth control by

increasing our insurance premiums in these days when families are struggling just to

make ends meet is an outrage. 

The mandate violates my conscience and that of millions of Americans who oppose

birth control on moral and religious grounds. 

It is undisputed that one of the operations of contraceptives is to render the

endometrium hostile to implantation, so that if fertilization occurs, the newly

conceived child may be lost to an early abortion. I also strongly object to the

inclusion of free sterilization as well as abortifacient pills like ella, which can work

weeks after a person's biological beginning to cause an abortion.

Not only that, but artificial birth control drugs are increasingly being found to cause

harm to women - most notably, they have been classified as known carcinogens.

And what of Catholic employers and others who oppose birth control, but are now

going to be forced to participate in these plans and/or offer it to their employees?

This flies in the face of the conscience protections that Americans have historically

enjoyed. Many will undoubtedly choose to stop offering health care insurance

altogether, further raising the cost of health care to all.

The conscience provisions attached to the rule are so narrowly crafted that they

would appear to force Catholic institutions to make free birth control and sterilization

available in health plans, or cease hiring and providing services to non-Catholics.

This is utterly unacceptable and flies in the fact of the principles on which this great

nation was founded!

It is incomprehensible that such a mandate is being forced upon the people of the

United States.

It is no secret that Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion chain in America, is

behind this mandate, and will reap huge financial benefits from it at a time when

citizens in the United States are working on both the state and federal levels to

defund the abortion giant. 

The majority of Americans are pro-life and WE DO NOT WANT our tax dollars and

insurance premiums supporting the nation's largest abortion chain.

It is imperative that you give credence to my personal objection along with those of

millions of other Americans who do not want to be forced to pay for and provide

medication, devices, and procedures that do not treat or prevent any disease or
illness, but distort and render inoperable a healthy reproductive system. This rule is

unjust, untenable, and un-American--and it should be stricken.

Sincerely,

Kerry Daly

Suquamish, Washington
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04

- 18

- 00557

- CV

IN RE DER DREAM LLC

Original Mandamus Proceeding 1

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

Delivered and Filed: August 15, 2018

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED

On August 8, 2018, r elator filed a petition for writ of mandamus and a motion for

emergency relief. After considering the petition and the record provided with the petition , this

court concludes that based on the mandamus record relator is not entitled to the relief sought.

Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is DENIED. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 52.8(a). Relator’s

motion for emergency relief is also DENIED

.

PER CUR IAM

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2017

- CI

- 16004, styled Robert R. Gonzalez v. Der Dream, LLC and Wienerschnitzel DFW ADI, LLC , pending in the 150th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Renée Yanta presiding.
No. 60208.

protest 235626-K/ 6132 (Chicago).

#### Merchants Forwarding Company *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Donlon, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of peppers in vinegar similar in all material respects to those the subject of *E. J. Petrosemolo Co., Inc.,*and *Barian Shipping Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(29 Cust. Ct. 159, C. D. 1461), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Exhibit
32.2


CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


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 Annual Report of AMF Capital Group, Inc. (the “Company”) on
Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Alan Miller, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as
adopted pursuant to §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.




IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
8th  day
of April, 2009.





/s/  Alan
Miller


Chief
Financial Officer
AO 450 (Rev. 5/85) Judgment in a Civil Case r

United States District Court

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

DANIEL FROID,

Plaintiff,

JUDGMENT IN A CIVIL CASE

v.

CASE NUMBER: C06-5079JKA

JO ANNE B BARNHART, 

Commissioner of Social Security, 

Defendant.

 Jury Verdict. This action came before the Court for a trial by jury. The issues have been tried and the jury has rendered its

verdict.

 / Decision by Court. This action came to consideration before the Court. The issues have been considered and a decision

has been rendered.

 IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED

Court GRANTS the Stipulated Motion for Remand. 

August 23, 2006 BRUCE RIFKIN 

Date District Court Executive

s/Kelly A Miller 

By Kelly A Miller, Deputy Clerk

Case 3:06-cv-05079-JKA Document 18 Filed 08/23/06 Page 1 of 1
No. 61556.

#### Herz Specialty Products, Inc., and D. J. Ambrosio *v.*United States,

protest 296937-K (New York).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of traveling irons similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Greatrex, Limited,*and *J. J. Gavin & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(33 Cust. Ct. 79, C. D. 1639), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

LAW OFFICES OF

MONTE E. HESTER, INC., P.S.

1008 SOUTH YAKIMA AVENUE, SUITE 302

TACOMA, WASHINGTON 98405

(253) 272-2157

MOTION FOR CERTIFICATE OF 

APPEALABILITY - 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

LAWRENCE P. SHANDOLA, )

)

 Petitioner, ) No. C05-05840RBL/JKA

)

vs. ) ORDER GRANTING PETITIONER’S

) MOTION FOR CERTIFICATE OF

HAROLD W. CLARKE, Secretary ) APPEALABILITY PURSUANT TO

and Chief Executive Officer, ) LOCAL RULE 22

Washington State Department )

of Corrections; )

)

 Respondent. )

______________________________)

THIS MATTER having come on regularly for hearing on the

motion of the petitioner for a certification of appealability;

the Court being fully advised in the premises, it is now,

therefore,

**

**

**

**

Case 3:05-cv-05840-RBL Document 27 Filed 12/14/06 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

LAW OFFICES OF

MONTE E. HESTER, INC., P.S.

1008 SOUTH YAKIMA AVENUE, SUITE 302

TACOMA, WASHINGTON 98405

(253) 272-2157

MOTION FOR CERTIFICATE OF 

APPEALABILITY - 2

ORDERED that the petitioner’s motion for a certificate of

appealability as to all issues is hereby GRANTED. It is

further

ORDERED that petitioner’s motion for leave to appeal in

forma pauperis is GRANTED.

DATED this 14th day of December, 2006.

ARONALD B. LEIGHTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Presented by:

LAW OFFICES OF MONTE E.

 HESTER, INC., P.S.

Attorneys for Petitioner

 

By:/s/

 Brett A. Purtzer

 WSB #17283

Case 3:05-cv-05840-RBL Document 27 Filed 12/14/06 Page 2 of 2
(A.R.D. 237)

#### United States *v.*Haddad & Sons, Inc.

Entry Nos. 766144; 23067.

Second Division, Appellate Term

(Decided March 28, 1968)

*Edwin L. Weisl, Jr.,*Assistant Attorney General, for the appellant.

*James G-. McG-oldrick*for the appellee.

Before Rao, Ford, and Beckworth, Judges

Kao, Chief Judge:

This application for review of the decision and judgment heretofore rendered by Judge David J. Wilson (R.D. 10874) having been formally abandoned, the same is hereby dismissed.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
Case No. 9,562.

#### In re MILLER.

[3 Cin. Law Bul. 967.]

Circuit Court, D. Indiana.

Nov. Term, 1878.

Grand Jury — Distkiot Attorney — Instructions not to Prosecute — Oath of Jury.

The grand jury, having the case of Casey W. Miller, charged with embezzlement in the First National Bank of Indianapolis, under investigation, came into open court and reported to Judge Gresham that the district attorney had received instructions from the president of the United States against prosecuting a certain party for alleged embezzlement in the First National Bank of Indianapolis, that they had been requested to investigate the matter, and desire to know from the court whether it was their duty to proceed with the case, instructions of the president to the district attorney to the contrary notwithstanding.

GRESHAM, District Judge

(charging jury). When you were impanelled at the beginning of the term you swore that you would diligently inquire and true presentment make of such matters as should be given you in charge, or might otherwise come to your knowledge, touching violations of the criminal statutes of the United States; that you would present no one through envy, hatred or malice, and that you would have no one unpresented through fear, favor, affection, reward, or the hope thereof. You could not, if you would, escape the obligation of this oath by heeding the instruction of the president in this particular case. The president may, if he feels so inclined, interfere, even in advance of indictment, by exercising the pardoning power. In no other way has he the slightest authority to control your action. He has it in his power to pardon the alleged offender, and unless he is willing to take this responsibility he has no more right to control your action than the czar of Russia. If you believe the president’s instructions to the district attorney were intended to prevent you from making the fullest investigation into the matter now before you, and from returning an indictment against the accused if the evidence should warrant it, you should be inspired with additional determination to do your duty. The moment the executive is allowed to control the action of the courts in the administration of criminal justice their independence is gone. It is due the president to say that the court does not believe he has any desire to encroach on the judiciary, -or that he contemplated any unwarranted interference by his instructions to the district attorney. The district attorney says in open court that he is ready and willing to aid you in any examination of this case which you may feel called upon to make. He and his assistants are faithful officers, and will render you all necessary aid in this as in other cases.
From: barned80@bigplanet.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 8:27:02 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,

Dave Barney

Salt Lake City, UT 84121
----

| CERTIFICATE      ADMINISTRATOR:LaSalle      Bank National Association135      South LaSalle Street, Suite 1625Chicago,      Illinois 60603Attn:      Global Securities and Trust Services GroupBane      of America Commercial Mortgage Inc.,Commercial      Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates,Series      2008-1Telecopy      number: (312) 904-2084  | DEPOSITOR:Banc      of America CommercialMortgage      Inc.214      North Tryon StreetNCl-027-22-03,      Charlotte, NorthCarolina      28255 Attn: StephenHogue      |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| TRUSTEE:Wells      Fargo Bank, National Association9062      Old Annapolis RdColumbia,      MD 21045Attn:      Dionne Waldron                                                                                                                                                                                                                           | With      a copy to:Henry      A. LaBrun, Esq.Cadwalader      Wickersham &      TaftLLP227      West Trade Street, 24th FloorCharlotte,      North Carolina 28202 |

|   | (A)    | a      review of CWCAM's activities during the period June 27, 2008 through December      31, 2008 and of CWCAM's performance under this Agreement has been made      under my supervision; and |
|--------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   |                                                                                                                                                                                            |
|   | (B)    | to      the best of my knowledge, based on such review, CWCAM has fulfilled all its obligations under this Agreement      in all material respects throughout the period noted      above.      |

----
Case 3:05-cr-05914-JKA Document 14 Filed 01/25/06 Page 1 of 2
Case 3:05-cr-05914-JKA Document 14 Filed 01/25/06 Page 2 of 2
Alcoa Wenatchee Works

Total Fluoride Data Lbs. TF/Ton Al

Roof Vent Line 1 Line 2 Line 5 T51 T51 P100 Comments Mar-13 1.3425 1.1689 0.7916 Lbs. TF/Ton Al Average of 3 tests Apr-13 1.3569 1.5824 0.7832 Lbs. TF/Ton Al Average of 3 tests May-13 1.1872 1.6223 0.8182 Lbs. TF/Ton Al Average of 3 tests Jun-13 1.5329 1.6546 0.8926 Lbs. TF/Ton Al Average of 3 tests Jul-13 1.6489 1.6602 1.0267 Lbs. TF/Ton Al Average of 3 tests Aug-13 1.6110 1.5251 0.9865 Lbs. TF/Ton Al Average of 3 tests Average1.4466 1.5356 0.8832 Lbs. TF/Ton Al

Reactor Line 1 Line 2 Line 5 A398 A398 GTC Comments Oct-12 0.0359 0.0151 0.0614Lbs. TF/Ton Al Single Test Jan-13 0.0271 0.0462 0.0614Lbs. TF/Ton Al Single Test May-13 0.0356 0.0195 0.1037Lbs. TF/Ton Al Single Test Jul-13 0.0244 0.0308 0.1237Lbs. TF/Ton Al Single Test Average0.0307 0.0279 0.0875 Lbs. TF/Ton Al
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 188 (Friday, September 29, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 67322]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-21356]



[[Page 67322]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Notice of 
Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 1009 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious 
Diseases Special Emphasis Panel; Cooperative Centers on Human 
Immunology (U19 Clinical Trial Optional).
    Date: October 31-November 2, 2023.
    Time: 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 
National Institutes of Health, 5601 Fishers Lane, Room 3G58, 
Rockville, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).
    Contact Person: Anuja Mathew, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, 
Scientific Review Program, Division of Extramural Activities, 
National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National 
Institutes of Health, 5601 Fishers Lane, Room 3G58, Rockville, MD 
20852, 301-761-6911, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#45242b302f246b2824312d2032052b2c2d6b222a33"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="92f3fce7f8f3bcfff3e6faf7e5d2fcfbfabcf5fde4">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.855, 
Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation Research; 93.856, 
Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Research, National Institutes 
of Health, HHS)

    Dated: September 25, 2023.
Tyeshia M. Roberson-Curtis,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2023-21356 Filed 9-28-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
From: ckp9955@aol.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 9:42:28 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,

CK Pearce

Miramar Beach, FL 32550
No. 64586.

#### F. C. Gerlach & Co. and Pro-Phy-Lac-Tic Brush Co. *v.*United States,

protests 58/9760(B) and 260576-K (New York).

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of synthetic filaments similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Empire Brushes, Inc., et al.*v. *United States*(42 Cust. Ct. 145, C.D. 2078), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
No. 67171.

protest 261974-K (Laredo).

#### J. W. Lewis *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Donlon, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues are similar in all material respects to those involved in *United States*v. *The Best Foods, Inc.*(47 C.C.P.A. 163, C.A.D. 751), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
No. P69/109.

protests 67/66511 and 67/67791 (New York).

#### Lipman’s *v.*United States,

Newman, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of “Duo Basket” strainers consisting of a strainer-stopper and base similar in all material respects to the merchandise the subject of *Hancock Gross*
      *1082
      *Mfg., Inc.*v. *United States*(60 Cust. Ct. 558, C.D. 3459), wherein said merchandise was held to be separately dutiable and that no separate value for each was returned by the customs official, the protests were dismissed and the matter remanded to a single judge sitting in reappraisement to determine the separate dutiable values of the strainer-stoppers and the basis in the manner provided by law (28 U.S.C., section 2636 (d)).