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

119TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 205 

To prohibit the use of Federal funds for congressional earmarks targeted 

to a State or unit of local government that is a sanctuary jurisdiction. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 3, 2025 

Ms. VAN DUYNE (for herself and Mr. ELLZEY) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition 

to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, for a period to 

be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee 

concerned 

A BILL 

To prohibit the use of Federal funds for congressional earmarks targeted to a State or unit of local government 

that is a sanctuary 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 ‘‘No Congressional 

5 Funds for Sanctuary Cities Act’’. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 205 IH

1 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON USE OF CONGRESSIONAL EAR2 MARKS TARGETED TO SANCTUARY JURISDIC3 TIONS. 

4 (a) PROHIBITION.—No Federal funds may be used 

5 for a congressional earmark targeted to a State or unit 

6 of local government which is a sanctuary jurisdiction. 

7 (b) CONGRESSIONAL EARMARK DEFINED.—In sub8 section (a), the term ‘‘congressional earmark’’ has the 

9 meaning given such term under clause 9(e) of rule XXI 

10 of the Rules of the House of Representatives. 

11 SEC. 3. SANCTUARY JURISDICTION DEFINED. 

12 (a) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided under sub13 section (b), for purposes of this Act the term ‘‘sanctuary 

14 jurisdiction’’ means any State or political subdivision of 

15 a State that has in effect a statute, ordinance, policy, or 

16 practice that prohibits or restricts any government entity 

17 or official from— 

18 (1) sending, receiving, maintaining, or exchang19 ing with any Federal, State, or local government en20 tity information regarding the citizenship or immi21 gration status (lawful or unlawful) of any individual; 

22 or 

23 (2) complying with a request lawfully made by 

24 the Department of Homeland Security under section 

25 236 or 287 of the Immigration and Nationality Act 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 205 IH

1 (8 U.S.C. 1226 and 1357) to comply with a detainer 

2 for, or notify about the release of, an individual. 

3 (b) EXCEPTION.—A State or political subdivision of 

4 a State shall not be deemed a sanctuary jurisdiction based 

5 solely on its having a policy whereby its officials will not 

6 share information regarding, or comply with a request 

7 made by the Department of Homeland Security under sec8 tion 236 or 287 of the Immigration and Nationality Act 

9 (8 U.S.C. 1226 and 1357) to comply with a detainer re10 garding, an individual who comes forward as a victim or 

11 a witness to a criminal offense. 

12 SEC. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE. 

13 This Act applies with respect to fiscal year 2026 and 

14 each succeeding fiscal year. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of HouseValues, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Form 10-Q), Ian Morris, Chief Executive Officer of
the Company and Jacqueline Davidson, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1) The Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (15 U.S.C. 78m or
78o(d)); and

(2) The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result
of operations of the Company.

Dated: November 3, 2006



/s/ IAN MORRISIan MorrisChief Executive Officer/s/ JACQUELINE DAVIDSONJacqueline DavidsonChief Financial Officer


This certification accompanies this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act). Such certification
will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

DONNA McLACHLAN, )

Plaintiff, )

) Civil Action No.

v. ) 3:04-CV-2580-K

)

COMMISSIONER OF THE SOCIAL )

SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, )

Defendant. )

ORDER

After making an independent review of the pleadings, files and records in this case, and

the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge, I am of

the opinion that the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct and they are

adopted as the findings and conclusions of the Court.

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the findings, conclusions, and recommendation of

the United States Magistrate Judge are adopted.

SIGNED this 22nd day of September, 2005.

 /s/ Ed Kinkeade 

ED KINKEADE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

 Case 3:04-cv-02580-K Document 19 Filed 09/22/05 Page 1 of 2 PageID 113
 

 Case 3:04-cv-02580-K Document 19 Filed 09/22/05 Page 2 of 2 PageID 114
I 

119TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 233 

To prohibit the availability of Federal funds to institutions of higher education 

that conduct painful biomedical research on dogs and cats. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 7, 2025 

Ms. MALLIOTAKIS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Education and Workforce 

A BILL 

To prohibit the availability of Federal funds to institutions 

of higher education that conduct painful biomedical research on dogs and cats. 

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 ‘‘Higher Education 

5 Loses Payments for Painful Experiments, Tests and Stud6 ies Act’’ or the ‘‘HELP PETS Act’’. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 233 IH

1 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON AVAILABILITY OF FEDERAL 

2 FUNDS TO INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDU3 CATION THAT CONDUCT PAINFUL RESEARCH 

4 USING DOGS AND CATS. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Beginning on the date that is 180 

6 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, no Fed7 eral funds may be made available to any institution of 

8 higher education that conducts or funds, in whole or in 

9 part, painful research on dogs or cats. 

10 (b) EXCEPTIONS.—Subsection (a) shall not apply 

11 to— 

12 (1) clinical veterinary research; or 

13 (2) any physical exam, training program, or 

14 study relating to service animals or military animals. 

15 (c) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

16 (1) CLINICAL VETERINARY RESEARCH.—The 

17 term ‘‘clinical veterinary research’’ means research 

18 on a dog or cat with a naturally occurring disease 

19 or injury that is conducted— 

20 (A) for the benefit of the dog or cat; and 

21 (B) with the intention of studying the ef22 fect of a procedure, device, or treatment pro23 tocol. 

24 (2) INSTITUTION OF HIGHER EDUCATION.—The 

25 term ‘‘institution of higher education’’ has the 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 233 IH

1 meaning given the term in section 102 of the Higher 

2 Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1002). 

3 (3) MILITARY ANIMAL.—The term ‘‘military 

4 animal’’ has the meaning given the term in section 

5 2583(i)(1) of title 10, United States Code. 

6 (4) PAINFUL RESEARCH.—The term ‘‘painful 

7 research’’ includes any research, biomedical training, 

8 experimentation, or biological testing classified in 

9 pain category D or E by the Department of Agri10 culture. 

11 (5) SERVICE ANIMAL.—The term ‘‘service ani12 mal’’ has the meaning given the term in section 37.3 

13 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO RULE 13A-14(a)/15d-14(a)

I, Robert V. Johnson, certify that:

1. I
have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of FCStone Group, 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(s) 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)) 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 registrants internal control over financial reporting that
occurred during the registrants 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(s) 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 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.

Date: April 19, 2006



|                             
|-----------------------------
|/s/ Robert V. Johnson        
|Robert V. Johnson            
|Chief Financial Officer      
|(Principal Financial Officer)



28
```

[Congressional Bills 119th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 146 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

119th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 146

To amend the Federal Reserve Act to prohibit Federal reserve banks from 
                  paying interest on excess reserves.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 3, 2025

 Mr. Davidson introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                    Committee on Financial Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Federal Reserve Act to prohibit Federal reserve banks from 
                  paying interest on excess reserves.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Prohibition on IOER Act of 2025''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON PAYMENT OF EARNINGS ON SURPLUS RESERVES.

    Section 19(b)(12) of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 461(b)(12)) 
is amended--
            (1) in the heading, by inserting ``required reserve'' 
        before ``balances'';
            (2) in subparagraph (A), by inserting after ``Balances'' 
        the following: ``of reserves required to be maintained by a 
        depository institution under paragraph (2) that are'';
            (3) by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (D); 
        and
            (4) by inserting after subparagraph (B) the following:
                    ``(C) Prohibition on other earnings.--A Federal 
                reserve bank may not pay earnings on balances 
                maintained at a Federal reserve bank by or on behalf of 
                a depository institution except as provided under this 
                paragraph.''.
                                 <all>
```
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### National Science Foundation

The National Science Board's (NSB) Committee on Oversight (CO) hereby gives notice of the scheduling of a videoconference for the transaction of National Science Board business pursuant to the National Science Foundation Act and the Government in the Sunshine Act. 

# TIME AND DATE:

Friday, January 10, 2025, from 1:00 p.m.-2:00 p.m. Eastern.

# PLACE: 

                        The meeting will be held by videoconference through the National Science Foundation, 2415 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA 22314. Members of the public can observe this meeting through a YouTube livestream. The YouTube link will be available from the NSB meetings web page—                        *https://www.nsf.gov/​nsb/​meetings/​index.jsp.*

# STATUS: 

Open.

# MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 

Chair's opening remarks and approval of previous committee minutes; Presentation by NSF regarding the Merit Review Digests for FY 2022 and 2023 and Committee discussion; Update by the Chief Financial Officer; Presentation by the external auditor for the Office of the Inspector General on results of the FY 2024 Financial Statement audit; Chair's closing remarks.

# CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

                        Point of contact for this meeting is Chris Blair,                         *cblair@nsf.gov,*                         703/292-7000.                    

Ann E. Bushmiller,

Senior Counsel to the National Science Board.

[FR Doc. 2025-00272 Filed 1-3-25; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
Juan MEZA-MEDINA, Appellant, v. RAYMOND BUILDING SUPPLY, LLC and Sedgwick CMS, Appellees.

No. 1D18-3493

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

March 15, 2019

Date of Accident: March 5, 2016.

Affirmed.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-51072

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

MARGARITA CARRILLO-HERNANDEZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. EP-97-CR-563-H

- - - - - - - - - -

June 19, 1998

Before REAVLEY, KING and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Margarita Carrillo-Hernandez (“Carrillo”) appeals her

conviction for importing marijuana and possession of marijuana

with intent to distribute. She argues that the evidence was

insufficient to support the inference that she knew the

automobile she was driving contained marijuana.

Because Carrillo renewed her motion for directed verdict at

the close of all evidence, we review the sufficiency of the

evidence to determine whether “a rational trier of fact could

have found that the evidence established the essential elements
No. 97-51072

-2-

of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt.” United States v.

Lopez, 74 F.3d 575, 577 (5th Cir. 1996). Based on evidence of

Carrillo’s sole control over the automobile, nervous behavior,

inconsistent statements, and implausible explanations for her

actions, we hold that sufficient evidence exists to support the

inference that she had knowledge of the hidden marijuana. See

United States v. Pineda-Ortuno, 952 F.2d 98, 102 (5th Cir. 1992)

(defendant’s guilty knowledge inferred from control over vehicle,

nervous behavior, conflicting statements, and implausible

explanation); United States v. Diaz-Carreon, 915 F.2d 951, 954-55

(5th Cir. 1990)(same); United States v. Anchondo-Sandoval, 910

F.2d 1234, 1237 (5th Cir. 1990) (defendant’s guilty knowledge

inferred from control over vehicle, conflicting statements, and

implausible explanations).

Carrillo also argues that the district court committed

reversible error by refusing to give her requested jury

instruction, which defined the term “knowingly.” As Carrillo

objected to the district court’s refusal at trial, we review the

district court’s decision for abuse of discretion. United States

v. Sanchez-Sotelo, 8 F.3d 202, 212 (5th Cir. 1993).

When confronted with the identical issue in Sanchez-Sotelo,

this court held that “knowingly,” as used in 21 U.S.C.

§ 841(a)(1), is used in its common meaning and, therefore, it was

not an abuse of discretion to refuse to include a definition of

“knowingly” in the jury instructions. Id. Accordingly, we hold
No. 97-51072

-3-

that the district court in this case also did not abuse its

discretion.

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
I 

119TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 58 

To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to make voting in a Federal 

election by an unlawfully present alien an aggravated felony, and for 

other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 3, 2025 

Mr. BIGGS of Arizona (for himself and Ms. MACE) introduced the following 

bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to make 

voting in a Federal election by an unlawfully present 

alien an aggravated felony, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Voter Integrity Protec5 tion Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. UNLAWFUL VOTING. 

7 (a) AGGRAVATED FELONY.—Section 101(a)(43) of 

8 the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 

9 1101(a)(43)) is amended— 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 58 IH

1 (1) in subparagraph (T), by striking ‘‘and’’ at 

2 the end; 

3 (2) in subparagraph (U), by striking the period 

4 at the end and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and 

5 (3) by adding at the end the following: 

6 ‘‘(V) an offense described in section 611 of 

7 title 18, United States Code, committed by an 

8 alien who is unlawfully present in the United 

9 States.’’. 

10 (b) DEPORTABLE OFFENSE.—Section 237(a)(2) of 

11 the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 

12 1227(a)(2)) is amended by adding at the end the fol13 lowing: 

14 ‘‘(G) VOTING OFFENSES.—Any alien who 

15 is unlawfully present in the United States and 

16 who knowingly commits a violation of section 

17 611 of title 18, United States Code, is deport18 able.’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
Case 3:04-cv-01381-L Document 57 Filed 01/27/06 Page 1 of 2 PageID 290
Case 3:04-cv-01381-L Document 57 Filed 01/27/06 Page 2 of 2 PageID 291
James Lee PRITCHETT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-2279

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

February 8, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
1497.

#### Smith *v.*Duke.

Powell, J.

1. The plaintiff sued, in trover for one sixty-incli solid Ohlen saw, No. 16,418. At the trial he proved that he had loaned the defendant a sixty-inch solid Ohlen saw, but did not remember the number. The defendant refused to return the saw after demand. There was no other *76saw in controversy. *Held,*that the failure to prove the number was immaterial.

Trover, from city court of Floyd county — Judge Hamilton. October 10, 1908.

Argued December 14, 1908. —

Decided April 15, 1909.

*M. B. Eulanlcs,*for plaintiff in error.

*John W. & G. E. Maddox, George A. E. Earns ■& Son,*contra.

2. Where the plaintiff in trover elects to take damages instead of the property, he may recover the value of the property at the date of the conversion, and either hire or interest from that date, according to whether the hire would be worth more than the interest or not. *O’Neill Mfg. Co.*v. *Woodley,*118 *Ga.*114 (44 S. E. 980); *Bank of Blakely*v. *Cobb,*5 *Ga. App.*289 (63 S. E. 24).

3. The evidence demanded the verdict rendered, and there was no error in directing it.

4. Under the facts disclosed by the record, the court deems it proper to grant the motion of the defendant in error that damages for delay be awarded. *Wilcox*v. *Leffler Co., 3 Ga. App.*740 (60 S. E. 357).

*Judgment affirmed, with damages.*
# C_2022119EN.01003402.xml

| 14.3.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 119/34 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.3.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 119/34

---

Judgment of the General Court of 19 January 2022 — Tecnica Group v EUIPO — Zeitneu (Shape of a boot)

(Case T-483/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU three-dimensional mark - Shape of a boot - Declaration of partial invalidity - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Decisions of EU trade mark courts ruling on an action for a declaration of non-infringement - Res judicata)

(2022/C 119/45)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Tecnica Group SpA (Giavera del Montello, Italy) (represented by: C. Sala, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Söder and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Zeitneu GmbH (Zürich, Switzerland) (represented by: K. Dumoulin, F. Hagemann, M. Giorcelli and M. Venturello, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 18 May 2020 (Case R 1093/2019-1), relating to invalidity proceedings between Zeitneu and Tecnica Group.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Tecnica Group SpA to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Zeitneu GmbH. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Tecnica Group SpA to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Zeitneu GmbH.

---

(1)  OJ C 320, 28.9.2020.

---