alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

FORT WORTH DIVISION 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA § 

 § 

VS. § CRIMINAL NO. 4:22-CR-135-Y 

 § 

DEZMOND HILL (1) § 

ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE 

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND ADJUDGING DEFENDANT GUILTY 

The Court has reviewed all relevant matters of record in this case, 

including especially (1) the Consent to Administration of Guilty Plea 

and Allocution by United States Magistrate Judge and (2) the Report of 

Action and Recommendation on Plea Before the United States Magistrate 

Judge. No objections to either have been filed within fourteen (14) 

days of service in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Therefore, 

the Court concludes that the report and recommendation of the magistrate 

judge on the plea of guilty is correct, and it is hereby accepted by the 

Court. Accordingly, the Court accepts the plea of guilty, and defendant 

is hereby adjudged guilty. The defendant’s sentence will be imposed in 

accordance with the Court’s sentencing scheduling order. 

SIGNED June 1, 2022. 

 

 _________________________________ 

 TERRY R. MEANS 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:22-cr-00135-Y Document 27 Filed 06/01/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 44
FILED IN6th COURT OF APPEALS    TEXARKANA, TEXAS2/3/2015 9:39:00 AM      DEBBIE AUTREY              Clerk
<PAGE>   1

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION LETTER TO WARREN JENSON
EXHIBIT 10.2



May 16, 2000

Warren Jenson
1200 12th Avenue South
Suite 1200
Seattle, WA 98144

Re: Special Bonus


Dear Warren:

As you know, we have tremendous challenge and opportunity ahead of us for the
year 2000 and beyond. I truly appreciate the integral role that you play in our
efforts.

In recognition and appreciation of your contributions, Amazon.com will pay you a
special bonus in the amount of $1,000,000 (One Million Dollars). This bonus will
be paid in equal monthly installments over a one-year period beginning with your
paycheck for May 2000 and will be subject to standard payroll practices and
applicable withholding taxes. If your employment with Amazon.com terminates for
any reason prior to payment of the full bonus, you will forfeit all remaining
payments.

Congratulations!

Sincerely,

/s/ JEFF BEZOS
-----------------------
Jeff Bezos
Chief Executive Officer
# App a

# App b

# Sheet3
Case 4:22-cv-00458-O Document 1-2 Filed 05/27/22 Page 1 of 14 PageID 9
Case 4:22-cv-00458-O Document 1-2 Filed 05/27/22 Page 2 of 14 PageID 10
Case 4:22-cv-00458-O Document 1-2 Filed 05/27/22 Page 3 of 14 PageID 11
Case 4:22-cv-00458-O Document 1-2 Filed 05/27/22 Page 4 of 14 PageID 12
Case 4:22-cv-00458-O Document 1-2 Filed 05/27/22 Page 5 of 14 PageID 13
Case 4:22-cv-00458-O Document 1-2 Filed 05/27/22 Page 6 of 14 PageID 14
Case 4:22-cv-00458-O Document 1-2 Filed 05/27/22 Page 7 of 14 PageID 15
Case 4:22-cv-00458-O Document 1-2 Filed 05/27/22 Page 8 of 14 PageID 16
Case 4:22-cv-00458-O Document 1-2 Filed 05/27/22 Page 9 of 14 PageID 17
Case 4:22-cv-00458-O Document 1-2 Filed 05/27/22 Page 10 of 14 PageID 18
Case 4:22-cv-00458-O Document 1-2 Filed 05/27/22 Page 11 of 14 PageID 19
Case 4:22-cv-00458-O Document 1-2 Filed 05/27/22 Page 12 of 14 PageID 20
Case 4:22-cv-00458-O Document 1-2 Filed 05/27/22 Page 13 of 14 PageID 21
Case 4:22-cv-00458-O Document 1-2 Filed 05/27/22 Page 14 of 14 PageID 22
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 220 (Tuesday, November 14, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 68128-68129]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-29085]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Army


Availability of Patents for Exclusive, Partially Exclusive or 
Nonexclusive Licenses

AGENCY: U.S. Army Soldier and Biological Chemical Command, U.S. Army, 
DoD.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of the Army announces the general availability 
of exclusive, partially exclusive, or nonexclusive licenses under the 
following patents that are listed in the SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION 
paragraph. Any licenses granted shall comply with 35 U.S.C. 209 and 37 
CFR part 404.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Robert Rosenkrans at U.S. Army 
Soldier

[[Page 68129]]

and Biological Chemical Command, Kansas Street, Natick, MA 01760, 
Phone; (508) 233-4928 or E-mail: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#45172a272037316b172a36202b2e37242b36052b24312c262e6b2437283c6b282c29"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="dd8fb2bfb8afa9f38fb2aeb8b3b6afbcb3ae9db3bca9b4beb6f3bcafb0a4f3b0b4b1">[email protected]</span></a> .

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The following Patent Numbers, title and 
issue dates are provided:
    Patent Number: 5,538,583.
    Title: Method of Manufacturing a Laminated Textile Substrate for a 
Body Heating or Cooling Garment.
    Issue Date: July 23, 1996.
    Patent Number: 5,320,164.
    Title: Body Heating or Cooling Garment.
    Issue Date: June 14, 1994.

Gregory D. Showalter,
Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 00-29085 Filed 11-13-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3710-08-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
IA

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 270

To ensure all residents equal access to quality health care services if a

managed competition health plan is enacted by requiring Members of

Congress to enroll in the lowest cost health care plan offered in a

Health Alliance area, and to impose an excise tax on Members of Congress equal to three times any amount the Member pays in health

care premiums above the amount paid by enrollees in the lowest cost

health care plan in the Health Alliance area.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 29, 1993

Mr. STARK introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred jointly

to the Committees on Ways and Means and House Administration

JOINT RESOLUTION

To ensure all residents equal access to quality health care

services if a managed competition health plan is enacted

by requiring Members of Congress to enroll in the lowest

cost health care plan offered in a Health Alliance area,

and to impose an excise tax on Members of Congress

equal to three times any amount the Member pays in

health care premiums above the amount paid by enrollees

in the lowest cost health care plan in the Health Alliance

area.
2

HJ 270 IH

Whereas under the Administration health reform proposal all

citizens will be able to enroll in one of a number of health

insurance plans in the region in which they live (known

as an Alliance area);

Whereas the premium rates and quality of these various

plans will vary significantly;

Whereas it is essential that lower income families and individuals be assured that plans with the lower premiums offer

quality service;

Whereas an easy and automatic way for Members of Congress to determine whether quality of care is being provided to the tens of millions of Americans who enroll in

the lower cost plans is for Members of Congress to enroll

themselves and their families (spouse and children) in

such plans: Now, therefore be it

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. That all Members of Congress and their

4 families enroll in the lowest price health plan in the Alli5 ance area from which they are elected.

6 SEC. 2. A Member of Congress shall pay an annual

7 excise tax equal to three times the annual difference be8 tween the health premium which the Member of Congress

9 pays and the premium paid by enrollees in the lowest cost

10 health plan in the Alliance area from which the Member

11 of Congress is elected.

Æ
# Recession Shading

# A.1

# A.2

# A.3

# 3.1.1.1

# 3.1.1.2

# 3.1.1.3

# 3.1.1.4

# 3.1.2.1

# 3.1.2.2

# 3.1.2.3

# 3.1.2.4

# 3.1.2.5

# B.1

# B.2

# B.3

# 3.1.3.1

# 3.1.3.2

# 3.1.3.3

# 3.1.3.4

# 3.1.3.5

# 3.1.3.6

# 3.1.3.7

# 3.1.4.1

# 3.1.4.2

# 3.1.4.3

# 3.1.4.4

# 3.1.4.5

# 3.1.4.6

# 3.1.4.7

# 3.1.4.8

# 3.1.5.1

# 3.1.6.2

# 3.2.1.1.1

# 3.2.1.1.2

# 3.2.1.1.3

# 3.2.1.1.4

# 3.2.1.1.5

# 3.2.1.1.6

# 3.2.1.2.1

# C.1

# 3.2.2.1

# 3.2.2.2

# 3.2.2.3

# 3.2.2.4

# 3.2.2.5

# 3.2.2.6

# 3.2.2.7

# 3.2.2.8

# 3.2.2.9

# 3.2.2.10

# 3.2.2.11

# 3.2.2.12

# 3.2.2.13

# 3.2.3.1

# 3.2.3.2

# 3.2.3.3

# 3.2.3.4

# 3.2.4.1

# 3.2.4.2

# 3.2.4.3

# 3.3.1.1

# 3.3.1.2

# 3.3.1.3

# 3.3.1.4

# E.1

# E.2

# E.3

# E.4
#### GOMEZ v. STATE.

No. 23138.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 30, 1945.

L. W. Schlesinger, of San Antonio, and S. B. Carr, of Floresville, for appellant.

Ernest S. Goens, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

DAVIDSON, Judge.

Upon his plea of guilty, appellant was assessed a term of two years in the penitentiary for cattle theft.

No statement of facts or bills of exception accompany the record. Nothing is presented for review.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.
IJNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

ABILENE DTVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

NO. 1:22-CR-040-02-H

HI'NTER DAKOTA KENNEDY,

Defendant.

ORDER ACCEPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

OF THE I]NITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

CONCERNING PLEA OF GIJILTY

After reviewing all relevant matters of record, including the Notice Regarding Entry

of a Plea of Guilty, the Consent of the Defendant, and the Report and Recommendation

Conceming Plea of Guilty of the United States Magistrate Judge, and no objections thereto

having been filed within fourteen (14) days of service in accordance w.ith 28 U.S.C.

$ 636OX1), the undersigrred District Judge is of the opinion that the Report and

Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge conceming the Plea of Guilty is correct, and it is

hereby accepted by the Court. Accordingly, the Court accepts the plea of guilty and

Defendant is hereby adjudged guilty.

Sentence will be imposed in accordance with the Court's scheduling order.

SO ORDERED,

44

Dated September L {, 2022.

JAMES LEY RIX

UNITED TATES DISTRICT JUDGE

ruc/{-

(

Case 1:22-cr-00040-H-BU Document 82 Filed 09/27/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 148
Case 3:22-cr-00192-N Document 31 Filed 04/18/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID 66
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH DIVISION

JOHN DOE,

Plaintiff,

v.

TEXAS CHRISTIAN UNIVERSITY,

Defendant.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

Civil Action No. 4:22-cv-00297-O

ORDER

Before the Court is (1) Non-Party Jane Roe’s Motion to Quash (“Motion”) (ECF No. 66), 

filed August 3, 2022 and, per the Court’s August 8, 2022 Order requiring the parties to respond 

(ECF No. 71), (2) TCU’s Response and Brief to Non-Party Jane Roe’s Motion to Quash (ECF No. 

78), (3) John Doe’s Response to Jane Roe’s Motion to Quash (ECF No. 79), and (4) Non-Party 

Jane Roe’s Reply in Support of Motion to Quash (ECF No. 81). In view of Roe’s scheduled 

appearance for testimony today, September 14, 2022 (Mot. at 1), the Court ORDERS that Roe is 

relieved of her obligation to comply with the subpoena until the Court further considers the Motion 

on its merits. 

SO ORDERED on this 14th day of September, 2022. 

Case 4:22-cv-00297-O Document 84 Filed 09/14/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 4157
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH DIVISION

DAVID RAY, §

 §

Plaintiff, §

 §

v. § Civil Action No. 4:22-cv-00438-O-BP

 § 

COMMISSIONER OF §

SOCIAL SECURITY, §

 §

Defendant. §

FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Before the Court are Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion for Attorney’s Fees and Costs Under 

the Equal Access to Justice Act (“EAJA”) and Brief in Support filed December 1, 2022. ECF Nos.

28 and 29, respectively. After reviewing the Motion, Brief, and applicable legal authorities, noting 

that Defendant does not oppose the Motion, and for good cause shown, the undersigned 

RECOMMENDS that United States District Judge Reed O’Connor GRANT the Motion.

The Court finds that Plaintiff, David Ray, was the prevailing party in this case. The Court 

further finds, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d)(2)(A), that the appropriate hourly rate at which to 

award fees in this case is $215.00 per hour for services performed in 2022. The Court further finds 

that Plaintiff is entitled to recover compensation for attorney services incurred of 31 hours in 2022, 

for an attorney fee award of $5,590.00.

Accordingly, the undersigned RECOMMENDS that Defendant be ORDERED to pay 

Plaintiff David Ray, and mail to his attorney, Jennifer Dunn, Coveney Law, LLC, 712 Plantation 

Street, Suite 3, Worcester, MA 01605, attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act, in the 

total amount of $5,590.00 for 31 hours of service in 2022 at a rate of $215.00 per hour.

Case 4:22-cv-00438-O Document 30 Filed 01/11/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID 692
2

A copy of these findings, conclusions, and recommendation shall be served on all parties 

in the manner provided by law. Any party who objects to any part of these findings, conclusions, 

and recommendation must file specific written objections within fourteen days after being served 

with a copy. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2). To be specific, an objection must 

identify the particular finding or recommendation to which objection is made, state the basis for 

the objection, and specify the place in the magistrate judge’s findings, conclusions, and 

recommendation where the disputed determination is found. An objection that merely incorporates 

by reference or refers to the briefing before the magistrate judge is not specific. Failure to file 

specific written objections will bar the aggrieved party from appealing the factual findings and 

legal conclusions of the magistrate judge that are accepted or adopted by the district court, except 

upon grounds of plain error. See Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1417 (5th 

Cir. 1996) (en banc).

SIGNED on January 11, 2023. 

______________________________________

Hal R. Ray, Jr.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 4:22-cv-00438-O Document 30 Filed 01/11/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID 693
Case 6:22-cr-00019-P-BU Document 10 Filed 06/29/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID 21
Case 6:22-cr-00019-P-BU Document 10 Filed 06/29/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID 22
----

|   | (i) | the                  quarterly report on Form 10-QSB fully complies with the requirements                  of                  Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of                  1934 (15                  U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and |
|--------|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (ii) | the                  information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material                  respects, the financial condition and results of operations of                  the                  registrant. |
|--------|------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Dated                    November 14, 2005. |   | By:    | /s/                  Stewart Wang                                                             |
|-------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                  |   |   | Stewart                  Wang                                                                 |
|                                                  |   |   | Principal                  Executive Officer and Principal Financial                  Officer |

----
#### BROOKS v. STATE.

No. 22770.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

March 22, 1944.

Edward Dwyer and Joe Burkett, both of San Antonio, for appellant.

Ernest S. Goens, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State. .

KRUEGER, Judge.

The offense is an assault with intent to murder. The punishment assessed is confinement in the state penitentiary for a term of three years.

The record discloses that appellant was charged by indictment with an assault with intent to murder with malice aforethought. The court submitted the case to the jury upon the law relative to an assault with intent to murder both with and without malice. The jury returned the following verdict:

> “We the jury find the defendant Guilty of Assault with intent to commit Murder & assess his punishment at 3 years confinement in the Penitentiary.

> “No suspended sentence.

> “Signed

> “W. B. Singleton

> “Foreman.”

Looking to the verdict as it is written, it is obvious that it is "impossible to tell whether they found appellant guilty of an assault with intent to commit murder with or without malice. The punishment prescribed by law for an assault with intent to murder with malice is confinement in the state penitentiary for a term of not less than two nor more than fifteen years, while that prescribed for an assault with intent to commit murder without malice is confinement in the state penitentiary for not less than one nor more than three years. Plowever, the court sentenced him to serve from two to three years in the penitentiary.

The difficulty arising from such an indefinite verdict in cases of this nature is the application of the Indeterminate Sentence Law, Vernon’s Ann.C.C.P. art. 775. Under the provisions of this law, the trial court was in no position to make a proper application thereof. Neither is this court in a position to do so because we do not know of what grade of offense the jury convicted the accused. In the absence of a determination of that issue by the jury, this court would not be authorized to arbitrarily reform the sentence so as to comply with the Indeterminate Sentence Law. See Johnson v. State, 137 Tex.Cr.R. 82, 128 S.W.2d 384; Lewis v. State, 140 Tex.Cr.R. 470, 145 S.W.2d 571; Jordan v. State, 140 Tex.Cr.R. 238, 144 S.W.2d 274.

In view of the disposition we are making of this case, we do not deem it necessary *866to discuss any of the other questions presented for review.

From what we have said, it follows that the judgment of the trial court should be reversed and the cause remanded, and it is so ordered.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.
| (logo) WELLS FARGO | **Commercial Mortgage  Servicing**D1050-084, 8th Floor  401 South Tryon St.  Charlotte, NC 28202  1-800-326-1334 |
|--------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

**ANNUAL STATEMENT OFCOMPLIANCE**

 

Reference is hereby made tothat certain Pooling and Servicing Agreement dated as of July 1, 2015, by andamong WELLS FARGO COMMERCIAL MORTGAGE SECURITIES, INC., as Depositor, WELLSFARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Master Servicer, RIALTO CAPITAL ADVISORS,LLC, as Special Servicer, PENTALPHA SURVEILLANCE LLC, as Trust Advisor, WELLSFARGO BANK, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Certificate Administrator, as Tax Administratorand as Custodian and WILMINGTON TRUST, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Trustee, withrespect to Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2015-NXS2 (the"Agreement"). Capitalized terms used herein not otherwise definedshall have the meanings assigned in the Agreement.

 

Pursuant to Section 11.12 ofthis Agreement, I, Daniel Bober, Executive Vice President of CommercialMortgage Services do hereby certify that:

 

1. A review of the activities ofthe Master Servicer during the period from January 1, 2016 through December 31,2016 (the “Reporting Period”), and of its performance per theAgreement during such period has been made under my supervision, and

 

2. To the best of myknowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer, has fulfilled all of itsobligations under this Agreement in all material respects throughout theReporting Period.

 

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, theundersigned has executed this Certificate as of the 28th day of February 2017.

 

/s/ Daniel Bober

Daniel Bober

Executive Vice President

Wells Fargo Bank

 

 

 

| Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. | (logo) Together we’ll  go far |
|------------------------|-------------------------------------|
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA F OURTH D ISTRICT

FUCIEN BREUS , Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA , Appellee.

No. 4D2023

- 0629

[ March 7, 2024 ]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.8 50 motion from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County; Kirk C. Volker , Judge; L.T. Case No. 50

- 2017

- CF

- 003266

- AXXX

- MB

.

Fucien Breus

, Perry , pro se.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Pablo Tapia, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.
Affirmed

.

G ROSS , D AMOORGIAN and C ONNER , JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
14TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT GEORGE L. ALLEN COURTS BUILDING

600 COMMERCE STREET DALLAS, TEXAS 75202-4604

June 21, 2022

File Copy

DC—22—05135 ELLA CAINE, ct a1 VS. EDUVISION, INC.

ALL COUNSEL OF RECORD AND PRO SE PARTIES:

The above case is set for dismissal, pursuantto Rule 165A, Texas Rules ofCivil procedure and pursuant

to the inherent power ofthe Court, on:

July 25, 2022 at 2:00 PM

If no answer has been filed you are expected t0 have moved for default judgment on or prior

to that date. Your failure to have done so will result in the dismissal ofthe case on the above date.

Ifyou have been unable to obtain service of process and you Wish to retain the case on the docket, you must appear on the above date, unless you have obtained new setting from the court coordinator.

Sincerely,

ERIC V. MOYE, DISTRICT JUDGE

14TH DISTRICT COURT Dallas County, Texas Cc: DON NGUYEN

7211 REGENCY SQUARE BLVD

SUITE 220 HOUSTON TX 77036

EXHIBIT D 

Case 3:22-cv-01713-S Document 1-4 Filed 08/08/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 18
IA

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 164

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to provide

a limitation on the terms of United States Senators and Representatives.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 24, 1993

Mr. SHEPHERD introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred

to the Committee on the Judiciary

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United

States to provide a limitation on the terms of United

States Senators and Representatives.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the fol4 lowing article is proposed as an amendment to the Con5 stitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all

6 intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when

7 ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several
2

•HJ 164 IH

1 States within seven years after the date of its submission

2 for ratification:

3 ‘‘ARTICLE —

4 ‘‘SECTION 1. No person shall serve in the United

5 States Congress more than two full terms as a Senator

6 or more than six full terms as a Representative.

7 ‘‘SECTION 2. Section 1 shall take effect at the begin8 ning of the first even-numbered year that begins after the

9 date of the adoption of this article of amendment. For the

10 purposes of that section, service before that section takes

11 effect shall not be included in computing the terms a

12 person has served.’’.

Æ