alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
From: sulliv362@aol.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 9:18:55 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,

Edward Sullivan

Pittsburgh, PA 15206
Docket No: FAA-2015-0937 Dir ID: 2014-NM-024-AD
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
          
                      
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-1-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 JUN-2-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   AUG-31-1996
<CASH>                                         3,988
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  1,616
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    49,508
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               57,936
<PP&E>                                         35,103
<DEPRECIATION>                                 13,350
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 83,223
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          26,157
<BONDS>                                        7,788
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       85
<OTHER-SE>                                     47,484
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   83,223
<SALES>                                        15,868
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               15,868
<CGS>                                          8,972
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  8,972
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               7,224
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             332
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (660)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (118)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (542)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (542)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (.06)
        


</TABLE>
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

ORD FOR

SVC & RESP - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

TATYANA DZHAFAROVA,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

MICHAEL CHERTOFF, et al.,

Defendant(s).

NO. C05-1652P

ORDER FOR SERVICE AND FOR

RESPONSE

Plaintiff has filed, through counsel, a Petition for Hearing on Naturalization Application, asking

this Court to adjudicate Plaintiff’s application for naturalization. Dkt. No. 1. Plaintiff also asks this

Court to grant monetary damages in the form of attorneys fees and costs associated with this action. 

Plaintiff alleges that United States Citizenship and Immigration Services has failed to adjudicate her

naturalization application within 120 days of Plaintiff’s naturalization examination, and has requested

that the District Court schedule a hearing on the matter, as permitted by section 336(b) of the

Immigration and Naturalization Act.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

(1) The Clerk shall arrange for service upon Defendants Michael Chertoff, Eduardo Aguirre,

Jr., Robert Mueller and Robert J. Okin, and upon the civil process clerk of the United States Attorney

for the Western District of Washington, with copies of the Petition, of all documents in support

thereof, and of this Order by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested.

(2) Within 45 days after such service, Defendants shall show cause why Plaintiff’s relief should

not be granted. As a part of such response, Defendants shall submit a memorandum of authorities in

support of their position, and should state whether an evidentiary hearing is necessary. Defendants

shall file the response with the Clerk of the Court and shall service a copy upon Plaintiff.

Case 2:05-cv-01652-MJP Document 3 Filed 10/05/05 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

ORD FOR

SVC & RESP - 2

(3) The Clerk is also directed to provide a copy of this Order to Plaintiff’s counsel.

Dated this 5th day of October, 2005.

AMarsha J. Pechman

U.S. District Judge

Case 2:05-cv-01652-MJP Document 3 Filed 10/05/05 Page 2 of 2
From: frodotravel@live.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 7:08:34 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,

Becky Miller

Albuquerque, NM 87106
#### Richard MORRIS, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Patricia STANSBERY, Respondent—Appellee, and United States of America; United States Parole Commission, Respondents.

No. 05-6432.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Aug. 17, 2005.

Decided: Aug. 26, 2005.

Richard Morris, Appellant Pro Se. Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before WILKINSON and SHEDD, . Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Richard Morris, a federal parolee, appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. *See Morris v. Stansbery,*No. CA-04-147-5-BO (E.D.N.C. Feb. 9, 2005). 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.

*AFFIRMED*
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

SLIMAN FARRAN et al., 

dba Jerusalem Café, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

JIMI A. JOUZINE, dba Gaililee Cafe,

Defendant.

Case No. C06-5116FDB

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO

WITHDRAW UPON SUBSTITUTION

OF COUNSEL

Counsel moves to withdraw or to confirm substitution of counsel, the Court having earlier

noted that a substitution of counsel alone (unless an attorney in the same law firm) is insufficient

under Local Rule GR 2(g). While Counsel’s approach may streamline the procedure, GR 2(g)(3)

requires that an attorney’s duty continues until there is a substitution and GR 2(g)(4)(A) requires

that “no attorney shall withdraw an appearance in any cause civil or criminal, except by leave of

court. Leave shall be obtained by filing a motion or a stipulation for withdrawal ... .” 

Accordingly, Counsel Rylander now having moved to withdraw and substitute Cheryl R. G.

Adamson of the law firm Rettig Osborne Forgette, LLP and having made the proper notifications to

his client and opposing counsel, and Counsel Rylander stating that there is no objection, Counsel

Rylander’s Motion To Withdraw or To Confirm Substitution of Counsel [Dkt. # 58] is GRANTED. 

SO ORDERED. 

DATED this 12th day of October, 2006.

AFRANKLIN D. BURGESS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-05116-FDB Document 59 Filed 10/12/06 Page 1 of 1
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Mardio TRIGG, also known as Trigg-C, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 04-10127.

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. -

Decided July 20, 2005.

*297Michael Gill, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Dallas, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Robert Sam Pestinger, Irving, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before BARKSDALE, GARZA, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

*ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES*

PER CURIAM: *

This court dismissed Mardio Trigg’s appeal of his sentence based on an appeal waiver provision in his plea agreement. *United States v. Trigg,*No. 04-10127, 2005 WL 1704528 (5th Cir. July 6, 2004) (unpublished). The Supreme Court vacated and remanded for further consideration in light of *United States v. Booker,*— U.S. -, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005). *Trigg v. United States,*— U.S. -, 125 S.Ct. 995, 160 L.Ed.2d 1021 (2005). This court requested and received supplemental letter briefs addressing the impact of *Booker.*

In his supplemental letter brief, Trigg argues that the district court committed *Booker*error. The Government reurges application of the appeal waiver.

A defendant may waive his statutory right to appeal as part of a valid plea agreement, provided that the waiver is knowing and voluntary. *United States v. Robinson,*187 F.3d 516, 517 (5th Cir.1999). The defendant must know that he had a right to appeal and that he was relinquishing that right. *United States v. Portillo,*18 F.3d 290, 292 (5th Cir.1994). When the record shows that the defendant read and understood the plea agreement and that he raised no question regarding the sentence appeal waiver provision, he will be held to the bargain that he has struck. *Id.*at 292-93; *accord United States v. McKinney,*406 F.3d 744, 746 (5th Cir.2005).

The record reflects that Trigg’s appeal waiver was knowing and voluntary. He preserved the right to appeal only (1) a sentence in excess of the maximum sentence; (2) an upward departure from the guidelines range; and (3) ineffectiveness of counsel. “The language in [an] appellate waiver must be afforded its plain meaning in accord with the intent of the parties at the time the plea agreement was executed.” *United States v. Cortez,*— F.3d -, No. 04-10152, 2005 WL 1404944, at *1 (5th Cir. June 16, 2005) (per curiam). Therefore, the reservations in Trigg’s appeal waiver do not preserve the district court’s factual findings and legal conclusions underlying its determination of the appropriate guidelines range. *See id.*(sentence in excess of the statutory maximum); *McKinney,*406 F.3d at 746-47 (upward departure).

Having reconsidered our decision in accordance with the Supreme Court’s instructions, we REINSTATE OUR JUDGMENT dismissing Trigg’s appeal from his sentence.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
No. 61571.

#### John Gross and Company *v.*United States,

protest 304115-K (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with rule 5 (b) of the rules of this court, as amended,-the protest was dimissed for lack of prosecution.
EXHIBIT 32.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE 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 PaperWorks, Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-K for the period ending August 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Rhoda Rizkalla, Chief
Executive 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.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
24th day of November, 2009.


/s/ Rhoda Rizkalla
--------------------------------
Chief Executive Officer
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      EXHIBIT 11

                       INTEGRATED CIRCUIT SYSTEMS, INC.

                        COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE INCOME
            ($ and shares in thousands, except for per share data)

<TABLE> 
<CAPTION> 
                                                                Three months ended      
                                                             ------------------------   
                                                              Sept. 28,     Sept. 30,   
                                                                1996         1995       
                                                             ----------   -----------    
<S>                                                          <C>          <C>            
Primary
-------

Net income                                                   $      629   $     4,161 

Common and common equivalent shares outstanding:
  Weighted average common shares outstanding                     11,318        11,180
  Assumed exercise of stock options                                  28           714
                                                             ----------   -----------    
Earnings per common share and common equivalent
  shares                                                     $      .06   $       .35
                                                             ==========   =========== 


Fully Diluted
-------------

Net income                                                   $      629   $     4,161 
                                                             ==========   ===========

Common and common equivalent shares outstanding:
  Weighted average common shares outstanding                     11,318        11,180
  Assumed exercise of stock options                                 174           717
                                                             ----------   ----------- 
                                                                 11,492        11,897
                                                             ==========   ===========
Earnings per common share and common equivalent
  shares                                                     $      .05   $       .35
                                                             ==========   =========== 
</TABLE>
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 

100447.0103/1339219.1 

LANE POWELL PC

1420 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 4100 

SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101-2338 

206.223.7000 FAX: 206.223.7107 

STIPULATION AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL - 1 

Case No. C05-5716 FDB 

 THE HONORABLE FRANKLIN D. BURGESS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 

AT TACOMA 

GWENDA LYN BILLINGS, 

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF 

AMERICA and THE TRUSTEES of the 

INDEPENDENT SCHOOL GROUP LIFE 

and LTD INSURANCE TRUST, 

 Defendants. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. C05-5716 FDB 

STIPULATION AND ORDER OF 

DISMISSAL 

CLERK’S ACTION REQUESTED 

STIPULATION

 The parties stipulate to entry of the subjoined Order without further notice to any 

party. 

 DATED this 13th day of November, 2006. 

LANE POWELL PC 

By /s/ Robert J. Guite 

 D. Michael Reilly, WSBA No. 14674 

 Robert J. Guite, WSBA No. 25753 

Attorneys for Defendants 

THOMAS R. DREILING 

By /s/ Thomas R. Dreiling 

 Thomas R. Dreiling, WSBA No. 4794 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

Case 3:05-cv-05716-FDB Document 12 Filed 11/16/06 Page 1 of 3
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 

100447.0103/1339219.1 

LANE POWELL PC

1420 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 4100 

SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101-2338 

206.223.7000 FAX: 206.223.7107 

STIPULATION AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL - 2 

Case No. C05-5716 FDB 

ORDER

 Pursuant to the parties’ stipulation, it is 

 ORDERED that based upon the parties’ stipulation and the pleadings and files in this 

case, the Court orders as follows: 

 1. All of the claims of the plaintiff against the defendants are hereby Dismissed 

with Prejudice; and 

 2. The parties are each to bear their own attorneys’ fees and costs. 

 

 DATED this 15 day of November 2006. 

A

FRANKLIN D. BURGESS 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Presented by: 

LANE POWELL PC 

By /s/ Robert J. Guite 

 D. Michael Reilly, WSBA No. 14674 

 Robert J. Guite, WSBA No. 25753 

Attorneys for Defendants 

Copy Received; Approved as to 

Form; Notice of Presentation Waived: 

THOMAS R. DREILING 

By /s/ Thomas R. Dreiling 

 Thomas R. Dreiling, WSBA No. 4794 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

Case 3:05-cv-05716-FDB Document 12 Filed 11/16/06 Page 2 of 3
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 

100447.0103/1339219.1 

LANE POWELL PC

1420 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 4100 

SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101-2338 

206.223.7000 FAX: 206.223.7107 

STIPULATION AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL - 3 

Case No. C05-5716 FDB 

Case 3:05-cv-05716-FDB Document 12 Filed 11/16/06 Page 3 of 3
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS OF  BIOSPECIFICS  TECHNOLOGIES  CORP.  FOR THE NINE MONTHS
ENDED  OCTOBER 31,  1997,  AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1

        
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-1998                
<PERIOD-START>                             FEB-01-1997                
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1997                
<CASH>                                       2,564,738       
<SECURITIES>                                 2,720,391       
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,573,442       
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0       
<INVENTORY>                                  1,545,926       
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             8,770,051       
<PP&E>                                       3,139,878       
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,164,080       
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              10,409,522       
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          946,567       
<BONDS>                                              0       
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0       
<PREFERRED>                                          0       
<COMMON>                                         4,886       
<OTHER-SE>                                   9,771,163       
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                10,409,522       
<SALES>                                      4,247,955       
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,247,955       
<CGS>                                        1,095,640       
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,095,640       
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,417,243       
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0       
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,793       
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                834,672       
<INCOME-TAX>                                   241,990       
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            577,567       
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0       
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0       
<CHANGES>                                            0       
<NET-INCOME>                                   577,567       
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.12    
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.12    
                                                                                  
                                                             

</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
GEOLOGICAL SURVEY BULLETIN 1006 PLATE 4

We a @) Shield supports
He f Adjustable lomp support assembly
]
oY ©) support rods 3/4 inch stainless steel 29 inches high
MTT T T 4 *
AL ! ©) ‘Fluorimeter’support
He
| i! ©) Fitters 2"x2"x36 to 1/2"
‘Aluminum light i
Adapter rin
| shield71/8'D. 7 © ° °
H il col ©) Gloss sample plate

@®)_ somple stide
© Shutter

©) fitters 2"x2"x 3/10"to v2"

(&) Fitter ring

© Amphenot connector

Reeecesses,

@) Support for tube socket

Ultraviolet lamp

felt lined
felt line! No. C-H, or E-H,

NTA

Slot felt lined:

|

In
i
|

|

|

WE lef
ZL)

‘Fluorimeter*
Phototube housing Sw
| os i

Wood base /6" square

A .
FLUORIMETER ASSEMBLY 268681 © - 54 (In pocket) No. 2