alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Union Calendar No. 320

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 373

[Report No. 103–575]

JOINT RESOLUTION

Disapproving the extension of nondiscriminatory

for other purposes.products of the People’s Republic of China, andtreatment (most-favored-nation treatment) to the

JUNE 30, 1994

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the

State of the Union and ordered to be printed
IB

Union Calendar No. 320

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 373

[Report No. 103–575]

Disapproving the extension of nondiscriminatory treatment (most-favored-nation treatment) to the products of the People’s Republic of China, and

for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 8, 1994

Mr. SOLOMON introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred to

the Committee on Ways and Means

JUNE 30, 1994

Additional sponsors: Mr. SANDERS, Mr. SMITH of New Jersey, Mr. BUNNING,

Mr. WOLF, Mr. ROHRABACHER, and Mr. GILMAN

JUNE 30, 1994

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union

and ordered to be printed

JOINT RESOLUTION

Disapproving the extension of nondiscriminatory treatment

(most-favored-nation treatment) to the products of the

People’s Republic of China, and for other purposes.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HJ 373 RH

1 That the Congress does not approve the extension of the

2 authority contained in section 402(c) of the Trade Act of

3 1974 recommended by the President to the Congress on

4 June 2, 1994, with respect to the People’s Republic of

5 China.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE Northern District of Texas

Dallas

)

USA )

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) Case Number: 3:22−cr−00339−X

)

Obadiah Fraser )

Defendant. )

DETENTION ORDER

Before the court is the government's motion to detain the defendant pending further

proceedings. After consultation with counsel, the defendant knowingly and voluntarily waived the right

to a hearing on the motion at this time, subject to any reservation of rights on the waiver form.

The government's motion for detention is therefore GRANTED.

The defendant is committed to the custody of the Attorney General or a designated

representative for confinement in a corrections facility separate, to the extent practicable, from persons

awaiting or serving sentences or held in custody pending appeal. The defendant must be afforded a

reasonable opportunity to consult privately with defense counsel. On order of a United States Court or

on request of an attorney for the Government, the person in charge of the corrections facility must deliver

the defendant to the United States Marshal for appearance in connection with court proceedings.

SO ORDERED ON 10/28/2022.

Irma Carrillo Ramirez

Magistrate Judge

Case 3:22-cr-00339-X Document 8 Filed 10/28/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID 13
IA

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 339

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

the terms of Representatives and Senators, and to provide for a fouryear term for Representatives.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 16, 1994

Mr. MINGE 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 limit the terms of Representatives and

Senators, and to provide for a four-year term for

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
2

•HJ 339 IH

1 ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several

2 States within seven years after the date of its submission

3 for ratification:

4 ‘‘ARTICLE —

5 ‘‘SECTION 1. Beginning with Representatives elected

6 in the first general election of Representatives occurring

7 during a year in which electors for the office of President

8 are chosen and after the adoption of this article, the term

9 of office of Representatives shall be four years and shall

10 begin at noon on the third day of January of the year

11 in which the term of office of the President begins.

12 ‘‘SECTION 2. No person shall be elected to the office

13 of Representative more than three times, excluding any

14 election of a person to fill a vacancy of an office of a Rep15 resentative if such person has held such office for less than

16 two years. No person shall be elected to the office of Sen17 ator more than twice, excluding any election of a person

18 to fill a vacancy of an office of a Senator if such person

19 has held such office for less than three years. For pur20 poses of this section, an election which occurs before the

21 date of the ratification of this article shall not be included

22 in determining the number of times a person has been

23 elected as a Representative or Senator.’’.

Æ
**IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVA NI**  **A**

IN RE: PROMULGATION OF CONSUMER PRICE INDEX PURSUANT TO 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 1725.1(f) and 3571(c)(4) : No. 428 : Judicial Administration Docket

**ORDER** PER CURIAM: And now, this 15 th day of October , 20 1 4 , it is Ordered pursuant to Article V , Section 10(c) of the Constitution of Pennsylvania and Section 3502(a) of the Judicial Code, 42 Pa.C.S. § 3502(a), that the Court Administrator of Pennsylvania is authorized to obtain and publish in the Pennsylvania Bulletin the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index for calendar year 20 1 3 as required by Act 96 of 2010 , 42 Pa.C.S. §§ 1725.1(f) and 3571(c)(4)(as amended).
* Pursuant to 5 TH 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 5 TH CIR . R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________ No. 05-51446 Summary Calendar

_____________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee, versus JUAN JOSE ROMERO-ROMERO,

Defendant-Appellant.

--------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas

(05-CR-79)

--------------------- Before SMITH, WIENER, and OWEN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * IT IS ORDERED that appellee’s unopposed motion to vacate sentence is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that appellee’s unopposed motion to remand case to district court for resentencing is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that appellee’s unopposed motion to extend time to file appellee’s brief for 30 days from this court’s denial of appellee’s motion to vacate and remand is DENIED as unnecessary. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## F I L E D January 10, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk
Exhibit A

Case 4:22-cv-00691-O Document 232-1 Filed 07/07/23 Page 1 of 3 PageID 4810
1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

FORT WORTH DIVISION 

JENNIFER VANDERSTOK, et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

MERRICK GARLAND, in his official 

capacity as Attorney General of the United 

States, et al., 

 Defendants. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Civil Action No. 

4:22-cv-00691-O 

[PROPOSED] SCHEDULING ORDER 

 The Court hereby ORDERS the following schedule pursuant to Plaintiff Polymer80, Inc.’s 

challenges involving judicial review of agency actions under the Administrative Procedure Act: 

I. CRITICAL DATES 

Timeline to Amend Pleadings 

Within 14 days of entry of this Order 

Motions for leave to amend due within 21 days 

of Defendants’ answer to amended complaint, 

if any 

Lodging of the Administrative Record(s) Within 45 days of entry of this Order 

Discovery Related Motions (e.g., Motions to 

Supplement the Administrative Record) 

Within 21 days of the lodging of the 

Administrative Record 

Dispositive Motions (Staggered) Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment due 

within 60 days of completion of the 

Administrative Record (including resolution 

of related motions to supplement the record) 

Case 4:22-cv-00691-O Document 232-1 Filed 07/07/23 Page 2 of 3 PageID 4811
2 

Defendants’ Response & Cross-Motion for 

Summary Judgment due within 45 days after 

Plaintiff’s Motion is filed 

Plaintiffs’ Reply & Response to Cross-Motion 

due within 21 days after Defendants’ Response 

and Cross-Motion 

Defendants’ Reply due within 21 days after 

Plaintiff’s Reply & Response is filed 

All other dispositive motions due within 60 

days of completion of the Administrative 

Record 

II. DISCOVERY 

 Polymer80, Inc., and the Defendants to this action submitted a Joint Report Regarding 

Contents of Scheduling Order in the related case of Polymer80, Inc. v. Garland, et al., No. 4:23-

cv-00029-O (Doc. 32). In that report, the parties stated that they “anticipate that the merits of 

Plaintiff’s claims will be resolved based on the administrative record and that fact discovery and 

expert discovery will not be necessary.” (Id. at 3 ¶ 5). The Court thus ORDERS that neither 

Polymer80 nor Defendants shall take fact or expert discovery in this action. The parties may, 

however, move to amend the Scheduling Order at any time for good cause shown and may move 

to supplement the administrative record by demonstrating unusual circumstances justifying such 

supplementation within 21 days of the lodging of the administrative record. 

SO ORDERED this [date] 

 

Reed O’Connor 

United States District Judge 

Case 4:22-cv-00691-O Document 232-1 Filed 07/07/23 Page 3 of 3 PageID 4812
1:30 - 1:40

1:40 - 1:45

1:45 - 2:00

2:00 - 3:45

3:45 - 4:00

4:00 - 4:10

4:10 - 4:20

4:20 - 4:30

4:30

DEPARTMENT OFTHE TREASURY

WASHINGTON,D.C. 20220

Federal Advisory Committee on Insurance

1:30 p.m. - 4:30p.m., September 18, 2013

Main Treasury, Cash Room

AGENDA

Welcome and Introductions

Approval of Minutes: June 12, 2013

Charter Renewal Update

I. Presentation of Renewed Charter

II. Nomination and Selection Process for Membership

Perspectives on the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program

I. Overview of the Program

II. Perspective from Marsh & McLennan Companies, Inc.

III. Perspective from Christopher M. Lewis (former Senior Vice President 

and Chief Insurance Risk Officer, The Hartford Financial Services 

Group) 

III. Perspective from Lloyd’s of London

IV. Questions/Comments from the Committee

Reinsurance Captives Update

International Developments Update

Subcommittee Updates

New Business

Adjourn
The State



# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

June 30, 2014

N o. 04

- 14

- 00287

- CR

Sandra MORTIMER

, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 290th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2013CR9808

Honorable Melisa Skinner, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

On April 3, 2014, the trial court filed a certification of defendant’s right to appeal stat ing

that this “is a plea

- bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal.” See T EX

. R. A PP

. P.

25.2(a)(2). The clerk ’ s record was filed. On May 22, 2014, we issued an order stating that this

appeal will be dismissed unless an amended trial court certification i s filed showing that the

appellant ha s the right to appeal i s made part of the appellate record by June 23, 2014. See id

. 25.2(d) (providing an appellate court must dismiss an appeal “if a certification that shows the

defendant has the right of appeal has not been made part of the record.” ). We further ordered all

appellate deadlines suspended until further order of the cou rt.

On June 20, 2014, appellant’s court

- appointed counsel filed a motion asking us to extend

the suspension of appellate deadlines until a full clerk’s record and a reporter’s record are filed.

However, b ecause all appellate deadlines have been suspende d, no reporter’s record will be filed

in this appeal

. And, n othing in the motion explains why the reporter’s record is required in this

appeal

.The motion is therefore DENIED.

_________________________________ Karen Angelini, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 30th day of June, 2014

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
Agenda 

November 2003 Refunding 

Treasury Dealer Meetings – October 30, 2003 

Dealer ___________________

To allow more time for discussion on Thursday, please e-mail your responses prior to 4:00 p.m. on 

Wednesday, October 29, to Jeff.Huther@do.treas.gov and richard.dzina@ny.frb.org. If you are not 

scheduled to meet with Treasury officials this quarter, your responses would still be very helpful to us, 

particularly answers to the discussion questions. Thank you. 

I. Borrowing Estimates 

 Central 

Estimate 

Range that would not 

surprise you 

 October – December 

 Ending Cash Balance 

 January – March 

 Ending Cash Balance 

 

II. Budget Deficit Estimates 

 FY2004 

 FY2005 

 

III. Quarterly Note Issuance 

 3-year 

 5-year – Nov 

 5-year – Dec 

 5-year – Jan 

 10-year 

 10-year reopening 

 10-year TIPS 

IV. Discussion Topics 

• Please elaborate on the estimates of our financing needs provided above. Do you see any risks 

to the current issuance calendar? If so, when do you think Treasury will need to make 

changes? 

• We are considering the introduction of a new TIPS maturity point(s). What criteria should 

Treasury use to examine this issue? 

• How effective have private sector initiatives and regulatory measures been in reducing fails? 

How do you think fails affect Treasury current and future borrowing costs?
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

 

LESTER LORENZO RUMMANS, § 

 §

Plaintiff, §

 §

v. § Case No. 3:22-cv-02046-M-BT

 §

HSBC BANK USA, NATIONAL §

ASSOCIATION AS TRUSTEE FOR §

MASTR REPERFORMING LOAN §

TRUST 2005-2, SPECIALIZED §

LOAN SERVICING, LLC, and §

NORTHSKY LLC, §

 §

Defendants. § 

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE 

JUDGE

The Court has under consideration the Findings, Conclusions, and 

Recommendations of United States Magistrate Judge Rebecca Rutherford dated 

September 1, 2023. The Court has reviewed the Findings, Conclusions, and 

Recommendations for plain error. Finding none, the Court accepts the Findings, 

Conclusions, and Recommendations of the United States Magistrate Judge. 

SO ORDERED, this 25th day of September, 2023.

Case 3:22-cv-02046-M-BT Document 33 Filed 09/25/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID 613
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AMARILLO DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA §

§

v. § 2:22-CR-00091-Z-BR

§

CARINA GLADYS ALVARADO (2) §

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

CONCERNING PLEA OF GUILTY

CARINA GLADYS ALVARADO (2), by consent, under authority of United States v. Dees, 125 F.3d 261 (5th Cir. 

1997), has appeared before me pursuant to FED. R. CRIM. P. 11, and has entered a plea of guilty to Counts 1 & 2 of the 

Superseding Information. After cautioning and examining CARINA GLADYS ALVARADO (2) under oath concerning 

each of the subjects mentioned in Rule 11, I determined that the guilty plea was knowledgeable and voluntary and that the 

offense charged is supported by an independent basis in fact containing each of the essential elements of such offense. I 

therefore recommend that the plea of guilty be accepted, and that CARINA GLADYS ALVARADO (2) be adjudged guilty 

of 21 U.S.C. § 843(b) - UNLAWFUL USE OF A COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY and 18 U.S.C. § 4 - MISPRISION OF 

A FELONY and have sentence imposed accordingly. After being found guilty of the offense by the District Judge,

☐ The defendant is currently in custody and should be ordered to remain in custody.

☒ The defendant must be ordered detained pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3143(a)(1) unless the Court finds by clear and 

convincing evidence that the defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to any other person or the community 

if released.

☒ The Government does not oppose release.

☒ The defendant has been compliant with the current conditions of release.

☒ I find by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to any other 

person or the community if released and should therefore be released under § 3142(b) or (c).

☐ The Government opposes release.

☐ The defendant has not been compliant with the conditions of release.

☐ If the Court accepts this recommendation, this matter should be set for hearing upon motion of the 

Government.

☐ The defendant must be ordered detained pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3143(a)(2) unless (1)(a) the Court finds there is a 

substantial likelihood that a motion for acquittal or new trial will be granted, or (b) the Government has 

recommended that no sentence of imprisonment be imposed, or (c) exceptional circumstances are clearly shown 

under § 3145(c) why the defendant should not be detained, and (2) the Court finds by clear and convincing evidence 

that the defendant is not likely to flee or pose a danger to any other person or the community if released.

Date: February 16, 2023

______________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

NOTICE

Failure to file written objections to this Report and Recommendation within fourteen (14) days from the date of its 

service shall bar an aggrieved party from attacking such Report and Recommendation before the assigned United States 

District Judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B).

Case 2:22-cr-00091-Z-BR Document 69 Filed 02/16/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID 151
EO sr,qT

~

s 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

o Q WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 a = 

0 

qt PROSto\ 

AUG 14 20112 

OFFICE OF Mr. J. R. Stroble AIR AND RADIATION 

Acting Manager, National TRU Program 

Carlsbad Field Office 

U.S. Department of Energy 

P.O. Box 3090 

Carlsbad, NM 88221-3090 

Dear Mr. Stroble: 

On May 24, 2012 and June 4, 2012, the Carlsbad Field Office (CBFO) requested approval by the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of Tier 1 changes to extend the gamma density range of the 

High Efficiency Neutron Counter Unit 1(HENC No. 1) NDA system and the Super High Efficiency 

Neutron Counter (SuperHENC) respectively at the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), actions 

that were identified as Tier 1 changes in the LANL baseline inspection report. EPA conducted a Tier 1 

evaluation of the requested change at LANL on June 20-21, 2012. DOE plans to use the HENC No.1 

and SuperHENC NDA systems to assay lead-lined drums. These lead-lined drums with cemented 

monoliths have significant amounts of 241 Am requiring shielding to address worker exposure concerns. 

These drums are significantly different from the lead-lined shielded containers which the U.S. 

Department of Energy is considering to use for emplacing remote-handled waste as they would CH 

waste at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant. 

Based on EPA's evaluation, EPA approves the two Tier 1 requests. The enclosed report (EPA Docket 

No. A-98-49; II-A4-164) supports EPA's decision based on the information reviewed. No changes were 

made to the LANL tiering table as presented in the baseline inspection report (see EPA Docket No. A98-49; II-A4-88, June 2007). 

If you have any questions regarding this approval, please contact Rajani Joglekar at (202) 343-9462 or 

Ed Feltcorn at (202) 343-9422. 

Sincerel , 

Tom Peake, Director 

Center for Waste Management and Regulations 

Enclosure 

Internet Address (URL) - http.//www.epa.gov 

RecycledlRecyclable • Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 100% Postconsumer. Process Chlorine Free Recycled Paper 
cc: Electronic Distribution 

Alton Harris, DOE EM 

Joe Franco, CBFO 

Ed Ziemianski, CBFO 

Norma Castaneda, CBFO 

Tom Morgan, CBFO 

Courtland Fesmire, CBFO QA 

D K Ploetz, WTS-CCP 

Craig Simmons, CCP-WTS 

Mark Pearcy, WTS-CCP 

Site Documents 

Tim Hall, NMED
# C_2018022EN.01000901.xml

| 22.1.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 22/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.1.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 22/9

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 23 November 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Commissione tributaria provinciale di Siracusa — Italy) — Enzo Di Maura v Agenzia delle Entrate — Direzione Provinciale di Siracusa

(Case C-246/16) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Value added tax (VAT) - Taxable amount - Sixth Directive 77/388/EEC - Second subparagraph of Article 11C(1) - Restriction of the right to reduce the taxable amount in the event of non-payment by the other party to the contract - Scope for implementation by the Member States - Proportionality of the period of pre-financing by the trader))

(2018/C 022/10)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Referring court

Commissione tributaria provinciale di Siracusa

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Enzo Di Maura

Applicant:

Defendant: Agenzia delle Entrate — Direzione Provinciale di Siracusa

Defendant:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Article 11C(1) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonisation of the law of the Member State relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment must be interpreted as meaning that a Member State may not make the reduction of the VAT taxable amount in the event of total or partial non-payment subject to the condition that insolvency proceedings have been unsuccessful when such proceedings may last longer than ten years.

---

(1)  OJ C 260, 18.7.2016.

1

---
[4910-13-P]

ROUHNGSYM80l. listed above. This proposed AD results from mandatory continuing ailworthiness SUMl\1ARY: We propose to adopt anew airw0l1rnness directive (AD) for the product ACTION: Notice ofproposed rulemaking (NPRM). AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT. Federal Aviation Administration Airworthiness Directivesj Airbus Model A330-223, -321, -322, and-323 Airplanes [Docket No. FAA-2010-***"'*j Directorate Identifier 2009-NM-255-AD] RlN 2120-AA64 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 14 CFR Part 39

INIT1A1..","'G



## * * * * * 

## * * * *
* 

## * * * * 

## "" {S/2-T/to Dual-bolt fractures could lead to inability formount assembly to sustain loads WUTTNGSYMOOl which may lead to an engine mount failure and consequently to engine separatio 1 A1JN1- [ClO from the aeroplane during flight, which would constitute anunsafe condition. INI 'S[' flfl11 DA1'~ 

# .5 ISIO INlT'AJ...<;iSl~t-.- During accomplishment ofDamage Tolerant - Airworthiness Limitation Item DJ/AIe task 712106-01-01 from A330 ALS Part 2, anA330 operator found afluorescen 

## J1f If) penetrant inspection (FPI) indication in thehead ofthe shank filetradius in one tl?ePratt &Whitney (PW) fonvard (FWD) engine mount pylon bolts. condition as: infOlmation (1vfCAI)originated by an aviation authority ofanother country to identify , m d ,. . .. de· r 

### 7~1110 an correct anunsa~econdition on an aViation pro liet. The M AI descnbes the unsale OlITlNGSYMBOL 

### AtJII'/-!

### '</

ROUTING SYMBOL The proposed AD would require actions that are intended to address the unsafe conditio I1IALS'SIG described inthe MeAl. DATE