alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2889 

To direct the Attorney General to acquire data, for each calendar year, 

about sexual offenses, including rape, that occur aboard any mode of 

transportation over which the Federal Government exercises jurisdiction. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 22, 2019 

Mr. CRAWFORD (for himself and Ms. NORTON) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To direct the Attorney General to acquire data, for each 

calendar year, about sexual offenses, including rape, that 

occur aboard any mode of transportation over which 

the Federal Government exercises jurisdiction. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Assaults on Water and 

5 Aviation Reporting Enforcement Act of 2019’’ or as the 

6 ‘‘AWARE Act’’. 


khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2889 IH

1 SEC. 2. STATISTICS RELATING TO SEXUAL OFFENSES THAT 

2 OCCUR ABOARD ANY MODE OF TRANSPOR3 TATION OVER WHICH THE FEDERAL GOVERN4 MENT EXERCISES JURISDICTION. 

5 (a) DATA COLLECTION.—Under the authority of sec6 tion 534 of title 28, United States Code, the Attorney 

7 General shall acquire data, for each calendar year, about 

8 sexual offenses (as such term is defined in section 

9 111(a)(5) of the Sex Offender Registration and Notifica10 tion Act (34 U.S.C. 20911(a)(5))), including rape, that 

11 occur aboard any mode of transportation over which the 

12 Federal Government exercises jurisdiction (including air13 craft, any vessel of the United States or which travels in 

14 interstate or foreign commerce or within the admiralty 

15 and maritime jurisdiction of the United States, any vehicle 

16 used or designed for flight or navigation in space, and any 

17 vehicle which travels via any facility of interstate or for18 eign commerce), disaggregated by— 

19 (1) the mode of transportation aboard which 

20 the offense was committed, including— 

21 (A) a specific disaggregation of offenses 

22 committed aboard cruise ships (as such term is 

23 defined in section 4071(d) of the Intelligence 

24 Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 

25 (46 U.S.C. 70101 note)); and 


khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 2889 IH

1 (B) a specific disaggregation of offenses 

2 committed aboard aircraft (as such term is de3 fined in section 31(a)(1) of title 18, United 

4 States Code); and 

5 (2) the location of the commission of the of6 fense. 

7 (b) PUBLICATION.—Not later than 1 year after the 

8 date of enactment of this Act, the Attorney General shall 

9 publish the data acquired under subsection (a), except 

10 that no personally identifiable information shall be pub11 lished. 

12 (c) ADDITION TO NIBRS.—The Attorney General, in 

13 accordance with the States, in compiling data regarding 

14 sexual offenses as part of the National Incident-Based Re15 porting System (NIBRS) shall include modes of transpor16 tation aboard which such offenses were committed. 

Æ 


khammond on DSKBBV9HB2PROD with BILLS
# C_2014024EN.01002602.xml

| 25.1.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 24/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.1.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 24/26

---

Action brought on 4 November 2013 — Royal County of Berkshire Polo Club v OHIM — Lifestyle Equities (Royal County of Berkshire POLO CLUB)

(Case T-581/13)

2014/C 24/47

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: The Royal County of Berkshire Polo Club Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: J. Maitland-Walker, Solicitor)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Lifestyle Equities CV (Amsterdam, Netherlands)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 25 July 2013 given in Case R 1374/2012-2; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 25 July 2013 given in Case R 1374/2012-2;

| — | Award the applicant the costs of the present proceedings and those incurred before the Board of Appeal. |
| --- | --- |

—

Award the applicant the costs of the present proceedings and those incurred before the Board of Appeal.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant

Applicant for a Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark containing the verbal elements ‘Royal County of Berkshire POLO CLUB’ for goods and services in Classes 9, 14, 16, 18, 25 and 28 — Community trade mark application No 9 642 621

Community trade mark concerned:

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community trade mark registrations Nos 8 456 469, 5 482 484, 532 895 and 364 257

Mark or sign cited in opposition:

Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejected the opposition in its entirety

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Partially annulled the contested decision

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) CTMR.

Pleas in law:

---
No. 10-6291.

#### Ravis Neal Key, II, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1182, 131 S. Ct. 997,

178 L. Ed. 2d 832,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 816.

January 18, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 599 F.3d 469.
# C_2013274EN.01003102.xml

| 21.9.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 274/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.9.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 274/31

---

Action brought on 9 July 2013 — ZZ v ECB

(Case F-68/13)

2013/C 274/51

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: L. Levi, Lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Central Bank

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

The annulment of the decision of the ECB to close the internal administrative inquiry as well as the inquiry report and the compensation of the moral prejudice the Applicant suffered.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of the Executive Board of 7th January 2013 taking note of the Final Report and deciding to close the internal administrative inquiry; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the Executive Board of 7th January 2013 taking note of the Final Report and deciding to close the internal administrative inquiry;

| — | as a consequence, annul the inquiry and the inquiry report and re-initiate a new inquiry with a regular assessment of facts; |
| --- | --- |

—

as a consequence, annul the inquiry and the inquiry report and re-initiate a new inquiry with a regular assessment of facts;

| — | grant a compensation for the material damage suffered assessed ex aequo et bono at 50 000 euros; |
| --- | --- |

—

grant a compensation for the material damage suffered assessed ex aequo et bono at 50 000 euros;

ex aequo et bono

| — | order the Defendant to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Defendant to pay the costs.

---
No. 10-7997.

#### Jason Lofton, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1193, 131 S. Ct. 1032,

178 L. Ed. 2d 852,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 639.

January 18, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.

Same case below, 393 Fed. Appx. 872.
No. 10-639.

#### Russell W. Roach, Petitioner v. Jeff Wrigley, Superintendent, New Castle Correctional Facility.

562 U.S. 1179, 131 S. Ct. 1007,

178 L. Ed. 2d 828,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 823.

January 18, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
# C_2016016EN.01001001.xml

| 18.1.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 16/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.1.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 16/10

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 19 November 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Baden-Württemberg — Germany) — Roman Bukovansky v Finanzamt Lörrach

(Case C-241/14) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Taxation - Agreement between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Swiss Confederation, of the other, on the free movement of persons - Relationship between that agreement and bilateral agreements on double taxation - Equal treatment - Discrimination on grounds of nationality - National of a Member State of the European Union - Frontier workers - Income tax - Allocation of fiscal sovereignty - Connecting factor for tax purposes - Nationality))

(2016/C 016/11)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Finanzgericht Baden-Württemberg — Germany

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Roman Bukovansky

Applicant:

Defendant: Finanzamt Lörrach

Defendant:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The principles of non-discrimination and of equal treatment, set out in Article 2 of the Agreement between the European Community and its Member States, of the one part, and the Swiss Confederation, of the other, on the free movement of persons, signed in Luxembourg on 21 June 1999, and in Article 9 of Annex I to that agreement, must be interpreted as not precluding a bilateral agreement on double taxation, such as the Agreement of 11 August 1971 between the Swiss Confederation and the Federal Republic of Germany, as amended by the revising Protocol of 12 March 2002, under which the power to tax the employment income of a German taxpayer who does not have Swiss nationality, although he has transferred his residence from Germany to Switzerland, whilst retaining his place of employment in the first of those States, is vested in the State in which that income originates, namely the Federal Republic of Germany, whereas the power to tax the employment income of a Swiss national who is in an analogous situation is vested in the new State of residence, in this case the Swiss Confederation.

---

(1)  OJ C 303, 8.9.2014.

1

---
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 120 (Tuesday, June 23, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34150-34151]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-16625]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary


Senior Executive Service Performance Review Board

AGENCY: Office of the Inspector General, Department of Defense (OIG, 
DoD).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the appointment of the members of the 
Senior Executive Services (SES) Performance Review Board (PRB) for the 
OIG, DoD, as required by 5 U.S.C. 4314(c)(4). The PRB provides fair and 
impartial review of SES performance appraisals and makes 
recommendations regarding performance ratings, performance awards and 
recertification to the Inspector General.

EFFECTIVE DATE: July 1, 1998.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Ms. Dona Seracino, Deputy Director for Operations, Personnel and 
Security Directorate, Office of the Assistant Inspector General for 
Administration and Management, OIG, DoD, 400 Army Navy Drive, 
Arlington, VA 22202, (703) 604-9716.

Charles W. Beardall--Deputy Assistant Inspector, General for Criminal 
Investigative Policy and Oversight, OAIG-for Investigations
C. Frank Broome--Director, Office of Departmental Inquiries
David M. Crane--Director, Office for Intelligence Review
Donald E. Davis--Deputy Assistant Inspector General for Audit Policy 
and Oversight, OAIG-Auditing
Thomas F. Gimble--Director, Acquisition Management, OAIG-Auditing
Paul J. Granetto--Director, Contract Management, OAIG-Auditing
Michael G. Huston--Director, Audit Planning and Technical Support, 
OAIG-Auditing
John F. Keenan--Deputy Assistant Inspector General for Investigations
Frederick J. Lane--Director, Finance and Accounting, OAIG-Auditing
Joel L. Leson--Deputy Assistant Inspector General for Administration 
and Information Management
Robert J. Lieberman--Assistant Inspector General for Auditing
Nicholas T. Lutsch--Assistant Inspector General for Administration and 
Information Management
Carol L. Levy--Director, Investigative Operation, OAIG for 
Investigations
Donald Mancuso--Deputy Inspector General
David K. Steensma--Deputy Assistant Inspector General for Auditing
Shelton R. Young--Director, Logistics Support, OAIG-Auditing

[[Page 34151]]

Stephen A. Whitlock--Special Assistant for Ethics and Internal 
Programs, OAIG-A&IM
Robert L. Ashbaugh--Deputy Inspector General, Department of Justice
John J. Connors--Deputy Inspector General, Department of Housing and 
Urban Development
Joyce Fleischman--Deputy Inspector General, Department of Agriculture
Joel S. Gallay--Deputy Inspector General, General Services 
Administration
Nikki L. Tinsley--Deputy Inspector General, Environmental Protection 
Agency.

    Dated: June 17, 1998.
L.M. Bynum,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 98-16625 Filed 6-22-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5000-04-M
# Inactive

# Sheet2

# Sheet3
**Exhibit
      31.2**




**CERTIFICATIONS**





I,
      Jeffery Feld certify that:





1.
      I have
      reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Able Energy Inc.;





2.
      Based
      on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material
      fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made,
      in
      light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading
      with respect to the period covered by this report;





3.
      Based
      on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
      included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
      condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and
      for, the periods presented in this report;





4.
      The
      registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing
      and
      maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
      Rules
      13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:





a)
      Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
      controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
      material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
      subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
      during the period in which this report is being prepared;





b)
      Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
      procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
      of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
      by this report based on such evaluation; and





c)
      Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over
      financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal
      quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report)
      that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect,
      the
      registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and





5.
      The
      registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most
      recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
      registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of
      directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):





a)
      All
      significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation
      of
      internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
      adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and
      report financial information; and





b)
      Any
      fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees
      who
      have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial
      reporting.





July
      31,
      2007




*/s/ Jeffery Feld**Jeffery Feld**Acting Chief Financial
                Officer*
No. 10-6536.

#### Heather Maria Ceballos, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 990, 131 S. Ct. 437,

178 L. Ed. 2d 339,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8318.

October 18, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 605 F.3d 468.
EXHIBIT 31.1RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) CERTIFICATIONS, ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACTOF 2002I, Sheldon C. Fenton certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Veridien Corporation;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have: a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is madeknown to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;  b) evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and  c) disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer’s most recentfiscal quarter (the small business issuer’s fourth physical quarter in the case of anannual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect,the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting.5. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small businessissuer’s auditors and the audit committee of small business issuer’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions): a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe small business issuer’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who havea significant role in the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting.        Date: May 15, 2007 /s/ Sheldon C. Fenton   Sheldon C. Fenton,   Chief Executive Officer
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Raymond Guillory, Appellant.

[768 NYS2d 318]

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (John Cataldo, J.), rendered on or about May 29, 2002, unanimously affirmed.

Application by appellant’s counsel to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see Anders v California,*386 US 738 [1967]; *People v Saunders,*52 AD2d 833 [1976]). We have reviewed this record and agree with appellant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous points which could be raised on this appeal.

Pursuant to Criminal Procedure Law § 460.20, defendant may apply for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals by making application to the Chief Judge of that Court and by submitting such application to the Clerk of that Court or to a Justice of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of this Department on reasonable notice to the respondent within 30 days after service of a copy of this order, with notice of entry.

Denial of the application for permission to appeal by the judge or justice first applied to is final and no new application may thereafter be made to any other judge or justice. Concur— Andrias, J.P., Rosenberger, Williams and Lerner, JJ.
# C_2014388EN.01001402.xml

| 3.11.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 388/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.11.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 388/14

---

Judgment of the General Court of 18 September 2014 — Polo/Lauren v OHIM — FreshSide (Representation of a boy on a bicycle holding a mallet)

(Case T-265/13) (1)

1

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community figurative mark representing a boy on a bicycle holding a mallet - Earlier Community and national figurative marks representing a polo player - Relative grounds for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009))

2014/C 388/17

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: The Polo/Lauren Company, LP (New York, United States) (represented by: S. Davies, Solicitor, J. Hill, Barrister, and R. Black, Solicitor)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: P. Bullock and N. Bambara, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: FreshSide Ltd (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: N. Lockett, Solicitor)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 1 March 2013 (Case R 15/2012-2), relating to opposition proceedings between The Polo/Lauren Company, LP and FreshSide Ltd.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 1 March 2013 (Case R 15/2012-2); |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) of 1 March 2013 (Case R 15/2012-2);

| 2. | Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by The Polo/Lauren Company, LP; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders OHIM to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by The Polo/Lauren Company, LP;

| 3. | Orders FreshSide Ltd to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders FreshSide Ltd to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 207, 20.7.2013.

1

---