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

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 9:28:26 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,

Ray David

Dearborn Heights, MI 48125
EXHIBIT 10.4

                                 CASH BONUS PLAN


In February 1999 the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors approved a
cash bonus plan which covers officers and certain key employees.

The President receives five percent of the pre-tax, pre-bonus annual income as a
cash bonus payable by March 15 of the following year. The other officers along
with certain key employees are pooled and receive an aggregate bonus of fifteen
percent of the pre-tax, pre-bonus annual income as a cash bonus payable by March
15 of the following year. Each individual participant in the bonus pool is
awarded a bonus based on individual performance criteria. If pre-tax pre-bonus
annual income is under $200,000 the bonus pool for officers and key employees is
twenty-five percent.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                            5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED FROM DIGITRAN
SYSTEMS, INCORPORATED,  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                                   <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                         9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                   APR-04-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                        JAN-31-1999
<CASH>                                                   18,000
<SECURITIES>                                                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                                           834,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                                  0
<INVENTORY>                                              82,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                        934,000
<PP&E>                                                  815,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                         (473,000)  
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                        1,276,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                 3,060,000
<BONDS>                                                 980,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                         0
<PREFERRED>                                               1,000
<COMMON>                                                156,000
<OTHER-SE>                                           (2,921,000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                          1,276,000
<SALES>                                               2,247,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                      1,831,000
<CGS>                                                 1,560,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                         3,247,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                              0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                              0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                      366,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      (1,366,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                  0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  (1,366,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                               0
<CHANGES>                                                     0
<NET-INCOME>                                         (1,366,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                             (0.10)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                             (0.10)
        

</TABLE>
From: alcworth@aol.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 10:21:27 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,

Ann Gabel

Ballwin, MO 63021
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 64 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. CON. RES. 64

  Providing for corrections to be made in the enrollment of H.R. 1119.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            November 6, 1997

 Mr. Domenici submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
                        considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
  Providing for corrections to be made in the enrollment of H.R. 1119.

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That in the enrollment of H.R. 1119, an Act to authorize appropriations 
for fiscal year 1998 for military activities of the Department of 
Defense, for military construction, and for defense activities of the 
Department of Energy, to prescribe personnel strengths for such fiscal 
year for the Armed Forces, and for other purposes, the Clerk of the 
House of Representatives shall make the following corrections:
    In section 3165--
            (1) in subsection (b)(1), strike out ``under the 
        jurisdiction'' and all that follows through ``Los Alamos 
        National Laboratory'' and insert in lieu thereof ``under the 
        administrative jurisdiction of the Secretary at or in the 
        vicinity of Los Alamos National Laboratory''; and
            (2) in subsection (e), strike out ``, the Secretary of the 
        Interior'' and all that follows through the end and insert in 
        lieu thereof ``but not later than 90 days after the submittal 
        of the report under subsection (d)(1)(C), the County and the 
        Pueblo shall submit to the Secretary an agreement between the 
        County and the Pueblo which allocates between the County and 
        the Pueblo the parcels identified for conveyance or transfer 
        under subsection (b).''.
                                 <all>
```
Ja SED S7,

~ T ~ S UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 2 < WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

41l q ~ 1.

~ PRO

~ E



### NOV 10 2011

J. R. Stroble Manager, National TRU Program Carlsbad Field Office U.S. Department of Energy P.O. Box 3090 Carlsbad, NM 88221-3090 Dear Mr. Stroble: On Apri15, 2011 the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), Carlsbad Field Office (CBFO) requested the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) approval of contact-handled (CH) solids (S3000) summary category group (SCG) as a Tier 1(T1) change. The Central Characterization Project (CCP) at the Hanford Site used components of the CH TRU waste characterization program that EPA approved in December 2010 to characterize waste stream RLCCPPUNIT. With this letter, EPA approves only the subject waste stream and is not approving solids as an SCG at this time. EPA generally approves the complete SCG at once for CH TRU waste; EPA is not ready to do that for S3000 waste at Hanford for the reasons described below. The enclosed report provides the approval details (A-98-49: II-A4-1 54) and will be placed in the Agency's public docket. The reason for providing a limited approval is two-fold. First, EPA has determined that the waste characterization information provided for this waste stream RLCCPPUNIT is not likely to be applicable for other unique Hanford solid waste streams such as the Hanford Tank Waste or K-Basin waste. Second, due to the budgeting constraints, in Fiscal Year 2012 and beyond, no CH TRU waste characterization will occur at Hanford. As a result, at Hanford, no CH TRU solid waste is being characterized at this time. In the future, when TRU waste characterization at Hanford is reactivated, EPA's evaluation of TRU waste characterization program for the December 2010-approved debris waste (S5000), new solid waste streams, and soils (S4000) will be necessary. In June and July 2011, EPA conducted a desktop evaluation of the CBFO-provided wastecharacterization documentation for three characterization components: acceptable knowledge, nondestructive assay, and nondestructive examination. EPA has determined that the documentation is sufficiently detailed and technically adequate.

Recycled/Recyclable



## ~ Printed wlth Soy/Canola Ink on paper that contalns at ieast 50 % recycled tlberIf you have any questions regarding this approval, please contact Ed Feltcorn at (202) 343-9422 or

Rajani Joglekar at (202) 343-9462.
Sincerely,
1.

— Tom Peake, Director Center for Waste Management and Regulations

Enclosure

cc: Electronic Distribution Ed Ziemianski, CBFO Courtland Fesmire, CBFO QA Nonma Castaneda, CBFO Mike Sensibaugh, CCP Tim Hall, NMED Raymond Lee, EPA HQ Site Documents
# Official Journal C 59/2012

| | ISSN 1977-091X
  doi:10.3000/1977091X.C_2012.059.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 59 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5528 February 2012 |

ISSN 1977-091X

doi:10.3000/1977091X.C_2012.059.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 59

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5528 February 2012

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | Council |
| 2012/C 059/01 | Notice for the attention of the persons and entities to which restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2011/782/CFSP and Council Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 as implemented by Council Decision 2012/122/CFSP and Council Regulation (EU) No 168/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria apply | 1 |
| 2012/C 059/02 | Notice for the attention of the persons and entities to which restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2011/101/CFSP as implemented by Council Implementing Decision 2012/124/CFSP apply | 2 |
| | European Commission |
| 2012/C 059/03 | Euro exchange rates | 3 |
| 2012/C 059/04 | Commission communication in the framework of the implementation of Directive 2001/95/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on general product safety(Publication of titles and references of European standards under the directive)
   (1) | 4 |

Notice No

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

Council

2012/C 059/01

Notice for the attention of the persons and entities to which restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2011/782/CFSP and Council Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 as implemented by Council Decision 2012/122/CFSP and Council Regulation (EU) No 168/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria apply

1

2012/C 059/02

Notice for the attention of the persons and entities to which restrictive measures provided for in Council Decision 2011/101/CFSP as implemented by Council Implementing Decision 2012/124/CFSP apply

2

European Commission

2012/C 059/03

Euro exchange rates

3

2012/C 059/04

Commission communication in the framework of the implementation of Directive 2001/95/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on general product safety(Publication of titles and references of European standards under the directive)
   (1)

(Publication of titles and references of European standards under the directive)

4

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
JUDGMENT – CV06-00194JPD 

Page 1 of 2 

C:\DOCUME~1\KMORIA~1\LOCALS~1\Temp\notesFFF692\Judgment.doc 

THE HONORABLE JAMES P. DONOHUE 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE 

NORTHWEST ADMINISTRATORS, INC., 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

CRESCENT TRUCK LINES, INC., a 

California corporation, 

 Defendant. 

NO. CV06-00194JPD 

JUDGMENT 

Summary of Judgment 

Judgment Creditor: Northwest Administrators, Inc. 

Judgment Debtor: Crescent Truck Lines, Inc. 

Principal Judgment Amount: $2,626.14 

Interest to Date of Judgment: $874.70 

Attorneys Fees: $636.20 

Costs: $350.00 

Other Recovery Amounts: NONE 

Percent Interest on Principal: Twelve percent (12%) per annum 

Interest Rate on Costs: NONE 

Attorneys for Judgment 

 Creditor: Reid, Pedersen, McCarthy & Ballew, L.L.P. 

THIS MATTER coming on for consideration upon Plaintiff’s motion for judgment 

against the Defendant, Plaintiff being represented by its attorney, Russell J. Reid of Reid, 

Pedersen, McCarthy & Ballew, L.L.P., Defendant not being represented, and the Court having 

Case 2:06-cv-00194-RSL Document 12 Filed 05/01/06 Page 1 of 2
JUDGMENT – CV06-00194JPD 

Page 2 of 2 

C:\DOCUME~1\KMORIA~1\LOCALS~1\Temp\notesFFF692\Judgment.doc 

reviewed the records and file herein, including the affidavit of Russell J. Reid and the exhibits 

thereto in support of Plaintiff’s motion, and being fully advised in the premises, now, 

therefore, it is hereby 

ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that Plaintiff be and hereby is awarded 

judgment against Defendant for the audit period July 1, 1998 through December 31, 2002, in 

the amounts hereinafter listed, which amounts are due the Plaintiff by Defendant for its 

inclusive employment of members of the bargaining unit represented by Local 741, with 

which the Defendant has a valid collective bargaining agreement, and which amounts are due 

by reason of its specific acceptance of the Declarations of Trust: for contributions of 

$2,188.45, for liquidated damages of $437.69, for pre-judgment interest of $874.70, for 

attorneys fees of $636.20, and for costs of $350.00; all for a total of $4,487.04, together with 

interest accruing thereupon at the rate of twelve percent (12%) per annum from the date of 

entry hereof until fully paid. 

Presented for Entry by: 

 Robert S. Lasnik 

 United States District Judge

JUDGMENT ENTERED this 1st day of May, 2006. 

A

s/Russell J. Reid______________ 

Russell J. Reid, WSBA #2560 

of Reid, Pedersen, McCarthy & Ballew, L.L.P. 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

Case 2:06-cv-00194-RSL Document 12 Filed 05/01/06 Page 2 of 2
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Isidro BARRERAS-VELASQUEZ, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 00-50332, 00-50376.

D.C. No. CR-99-2561-JNK.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted June 7, 2001 *.

Decided June 28, 2001.

*588Before KOZINSKI and THOMAS, Circuit Judges, and WHYTE,** District Judge.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

**

The Honorable Ronald M. Whyte, United States District Judge for the Northern District of California, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM ***

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Barreras’ motion to continue the .trial date. The district judge properly concluded that the proffered witness testimony was not necessary, and Barreras’ general contention that he did not have enough time to investigate the witness’ background is insufficient to establish that the denial was arbitrary or unreasonable. *See United States v. Flynt,*756 F.2d 1352, 1358-59 (9th Cir.1985). Barreras’ claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is not appropriate for resolution on appeal because it requires development of facts outside of the record. *See United States v. Ross,*206 F.3d 896, 900 (9th Cir.2000). The testimony of Agents Nelson and Essenberg was sufficient to establish a chain of custody under *United States v. Harrington,*923 F.2d 1371 (9th Cir.1991), and the district court’s admission of the seized methamphetamine and photographs thus did not constitute an abuse of discretion. *See*Fed.R.Evid. 901(a). Finally, the district court did not err under *Apprendi v. New Jersey,*530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), because Barreras’ sentence — 20 years — did not exceed the statutory maximum under 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(C) for distribution of any quantity of methamphetamine. *See United States v. Egge,*223 F.3d 1128, 1132 n. 1 (9th Cir.2000).

AFFIRMED.

***

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
p.1 

OAR Box 1828 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

98) ll-K- (B) -87 

Docket Number: 

A-83-27 

Printed 11/12/2008 11:12:51 AM Sheet 98 of 325 
P.2 

y\\ Pl 

^ ° CO i 

COST-EFFECTIVENESS COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVE 

REGULATORY OPTIONS FOR THE INDUSTRIAL BOILER NSPS 

Letter from M. Lerner, EEA to R. Short, EPA:EAB 

II-K-(B)-87 

July 7, 1982 

THIS INFORMATION CAN BE FOUND IN DOCKET A-79-02, ITEM 

II-K-(;B)-87
No. 65236.

#### Joseph Markovits, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 60/8886 (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, O. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of fiber or hemp articles similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 63552, the claim of the plaintiff 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

26

27

28

ORDER

Page - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

LENIER RENE AYERS,

Plaintiff,

v.

HENRI RICHARDS, et al,

Defendants.

Case No. C06-05264RBL-KLS

ORDER REGARDING SERVICE

OF COMPLAINT BY UNITED

STATES MARSHALS

This matter comes before the court on plaintiff’s filing of a motion to obtain the home addresses of the

named defendants in this case. (Dkt. #10). Plaintiff’s motion hereby is DENIED for the following reasons:

On August 21, 2006, the Court issued an order directing service by the United States Marshal to serve

on the named defendants the forms for service and copies of the complaint provided by plaintiff. (Dkt. #13). 

The United States Marshal attempted service via the United States mail on September 1, 2006, but service of

the summons and complaint was returned un-executed on September 13, 2006, due to the fact that plaintiff had

provided the incorrect address. 

The Court subsequently was informed by the Clerk that plaintiff already has been notified as to the

Case 3:06-cv-05264-RBL-KLS Document 20 Filed 11/07/06 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

27

28

ORDER

Page - 2

correct address for service of the summons and complaint on defendants at the Special Commitment Center. 

Accordingly, the Court will not grant plaintiff’s request to obtain the named defendants’ home addresses, nor

will the Court otherwise order service of the complaint at this time. 

Instead, the Clerk is directed to send five (5) service forms to plaintiff for him to fill out with the

correct service address and return to the Court so that the Court can attempt service by mail. Plaintiff also must

provide five (5) additional copies of the complaint for service. Both the forms and the copies of the complaint

must be returned on or before December 7, 2006, or the Court will recommend dismissal for failure to

prosecute. 

The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Order to plaintiff. 

DATED this 7th day of November, 2006.

A

Karen L. Strombom

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:06-cv-05264-RBL-KLS Document 20 Filed 11/07/06 Page 2 of 2
Hummingbird

Springs Wilderness

Big Horn

Mountains

Wilderness

Harquahala

Mountains

Wilderness

Hells Canyon

Wilderness

Hassayampa

River Canyon

Wilderness

Castle Creek

Wilderness

Mohave County

Yavapai County

Yavapai

Marico

County

pa County

La Paz County

Maricopa County

White Tank

Mountains

Regional Park

Lake

Pleasant

Regional

Park

Prescott

Prescott

Valley

Cordes

Junction

Yarnell

BLACK

CANYON

CITY

NEW

RIVER

WICKENBURG

PEORIA

SURPRISE

BUCKEYE

GOODYEAR

PHOENIX

GLENDALE

Bureau of Land Management

Phoenix District Office

Phoenix, AZ

October 2009

Note: Land Status legend located on Map 1

Map 17

Bradshaw-Harquahala

Planning Areas

Burro Herd Areas

0 5 10 15

Miles

BLM Wilderness

USFS Wilderness

Interstate

Major Road

Major River, Streams or Wash

Highway

Agua Fria National

Monument Planning Area

Bradshaw Harquahala

Planning Area

Resource Allocations

Burro Herd Area

Burro Herd Management Area

Note: The Bureau of Land Management (BLM)

conducts land use planning only in the areas administered

by BLM. BLM has no planning authority under the

municipal or county planning legislation of the State

of Arizona.

No warranty is made by BLM for the use of this map

for purposes not intended by BLM, or to the accuracy,

reliability or completeness of the information shown.

Spatial information may not meet National Map Accuracy

standards. This information may be updated without

notification.