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

[Congressional Bills 119th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 12 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

119th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 12

  Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to 
     limit the number of terms that a Member of Congress may serve.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 6, 2025

 Mr. Norman (for himself, Mr. Allen, Ms. Mace, Mr. Brecheen, Mr. Self, 
  Mr. Rulli, Mr. Crank, Mrs. Kiggans of Virginia, Mrs. Fischbach, Mr. 
 Evans of Colorado, Mr. Davidson, Mr. Landsman, Mr. Perry, Mr. Taylor, 
   Mrs. Biggs of South Carolina, Mr. Bean of Florida, Ms. Perez, Mr. 
Ezell, Mr. Ogles, Mr. Moran, Mr. Biggs of Arizona, Mr. Golden of Maine, 
 Mr. Palmer, Mr. Roy, Mr. Strong, Mr. Moore of Utah, Mrs. Cammack, Mr. 
  Tiffany, and Mr. Barrett) submitted 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 number of terms that a Member of Congress may serve.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled   (two-thirds of each House 
concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an 
amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be 
valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when 
ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States 
within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:

                              ``Article--

    ``Section 1. No person who has served 3 terms as a Representative 
shall be eligible for election to the House of Representatives. For 
purposes of this section, the election of a person to fill a vacancy in 
the House of Representatives shall be included as 1 term in determining 
the number of terms that such person has served as a Representative if 
the person fills the vacancy for more than 1 year.
    ``Section 2. No person who has served 2 terms as a Senator shall be 
eligible for election or appointment to the Senate. For purposes of 
this section, the election or appointment of a person to fill a vacancy 
in the Senate shall be included as 1 term in determining the number of 
terms that such person has served as a Senator if the person fills the 
vacancy for more than 3 years.
    ``Section 3. No term beginning before the date of the ratification 
of this article shall be taken into account in determining eligibility 
for election or appointment under this article.''.
                                 <all>
```
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-2514
DEBORAH D. HARDEN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus OCONEE COUNTY; OCONEE COUNTY ASSESSORS OFFICE; OCONEE COUNTY HUMAN RESOURCES OFFICE; OCONEE COUNTY SUPERVISOR, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District ofSouth Carolina, at Anderson. Henry F. Floyd, District Judge. (CA03-4114-8-26-B1) Submitted: March 30, 2005 Decided: April 14, 2005 Before WILKINSON and KING, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Deborah D. Harden, Appellant Pro Se. James William Logan, Jr., LOGAN, JOLLY & SMITH, LLP, Anderson, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Deborah D. Harden seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying Defendants’ motion to dismiss one claim, granting Harden leave to amend another claim, and recommitting the matter to the magistrate judge. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2000), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2000); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp. , 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The order Harden seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
I 

119TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 107 

To require Executive agencies to reinstate telework policies that were in 

place on December 31, 2019, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 3, 2025 

Mr. BIGGS of Arizona introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

A BILL 

To require Executive agencies to reinstate telework policies 

that were in place on December 31, 2019, 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 ‘‘Return to Work Act’’. 

5 SEC. 2. REINSTATE PRIOR REMOTE WORK POLICIES. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 60 days after the 

7 date of the enactment of this Act, the head of each Execu8 tive agency shall reinstate the telework policies in use by 

9 such Executive agency on December 31, 2019. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 107 IH

1 (b) RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.—Beginning on the 

2 date on which the head of an Executive agency reinstates 

3 the telework policies in use by such Executive agency on 

4 December 31, 2019, the reinstated telework policy of such 

5 Executive agency shall apply in place of any telework pro6 vision of a teleworking, collective bargaining, or other em7 ployment agreement of such Executive agency to the ex8 tent that such telework provision conflicts with, or applies 

9 a different telework policy than, the reinstated telework 

10 policy of such Executive agency. 

11 (c) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

12 (1) EXECUTIVE AGENCY.—The term ‘‘Executive 

13 agency’’ has the meaning given such term in section 

14 105 of title 5, United States Code. 

15 (2) REINSTATED TELEWORK POLICY.—The 

16 term ‘‘reinstated telework policy’’ means the 

17 telework policies in use by an Executive agency on 

18 December 31, 2019. 

19 (3) TELEWORK.—The term ‘‘telework’’ has the 

20 meaning given such term in section 6501 of title 5, 

21 United States Code. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             264,535,242
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                    118,919,412
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                 145,615,830
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               264,535,242
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                          (44,722,548)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        (14,076,009)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (56,813,557)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (56,813,557)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (56,813,557)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
# C_2019206EN.01000601.xml

| 17.6.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 206/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.6.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 206/6

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 11 April 2019 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom — United Kingdom) — Peter Bosworth, Colin Hurley v Arcadia Petroleum Limited and Others

(Case C-603/17) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Area of freedom, security and justice - Judicial cooperation in civil matters - Lugano II Convention - Jurisdiction and recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters - Title II, Section 5 (Articles 18 to 21) - Jurisdiction over individual contracts of employment)

(2019/C 206/07)

Language of the case: English

Referring court

Supreme Court of the United Kingdom

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Peter Bosworth, Colin Hurley

Defendants: Arcadia Petroleum Limited and Others

Operative part of the judgment

The provisions of Section 5 of Title II (Articles 18 to 21) of the Convention on jurisdiction and the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters, signed on 30 October 2007, the conclusion of which was approved on behalf of the Community by Council Decision 2009/430/EC of 27 November 2008, must be interpreted as meaning that a contract between a company and a natural person performing the duties of director of that company does not create a relationship of subordination between them and cannot, therefore, be treated as an ‘individual contract of employment’, within the meaning of those provisions, where, even if the shareholder(s) of that company have the power to procure the termination of that contract, that person is able to determine or does determine the terms of that contract and has control and autonomy over the day-to-day operation of that company’s business and the performance of his own duties.

---

(1)  OJ C 437, 18.12.2017.

---
STATE of Louisiana IN the INTEREST OF A.N.

NO. 2018-CK-1571

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 25, 2019

And, whereas, the Court has this date, pursuant to Article 5, Section 5, of the Constitution of Louisiana, made and issued the following order, to wit- "It is ordered that the writ of review issue; that the District Court and the Court of Appeal send up the record in Duplicate of the case; and that counsel for all parties be notified."

Now, therefore, the said District Court and the Court of Appeal is hereby commanded, in the name of the State of Louisiana and of this Honorable Court, to send up forthwith to this Court, in accordance with Supreme Court Rule 1, at the City of New Orleans, the record in duplicate of the above-entitled case.
Exhibit 31

ORIENT-EXPRESS HOTELS LTD.    Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification

I, James B. Sherwood, certify that:



1

---





|Dated: March 4, 2005 |  | /s/J.B. SHERWOODJames B. Sherwood Chairman
(Co-Chief Executive Officer)
|-------------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------

2

---



ORIENT-EXPRESS HOTELS LTD.    Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification

I, Simon M.C. Sherwood, certify that:



3

---





|Dated: March 4, 2005 |  | /s/S.M.C. SHERWOODSimon M.C. Sherwood President
(Co-Chief Executive Officer)
|-------------------- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

4

---



ORIENT-EXPRESS HOTELS LTD.    Rule 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certification

I, James G. Struthers, certify that:



5

---





|Dated: March 4, 2005 |  | /s/J.G. STRUTHERSJames G. Struthers Vice
PresidentFinance
and Chief Financial Officer
|-------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

6

---



QuickLinks
Case 4:03-cv-00422-A Document 22 Filed 05/18/04 Page 1 of 1 PageID 138
# C_2016270EN.01004701.xml

| 25.7.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 270/47 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.7.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 270/47

---

Action brought on 11 May 2016 — Hansen Medical v EUIPO — Covidien (MAGELLAN)

(Case T-222/16)

(2016/C 270/54)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Hansen Medical, Inc. (Mountain View, California, United States) (represented by: R. Kunze, Solicitor, G. Würtenberger, T. Wittmann, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Covidien AG (Neuhausen am Rheinfall, Switzerland)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue:

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark ‘MAGELLAN’ – EU trade mark No 5 437 711

Trade mark at issue:

Procedure before EUIPO: Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity

Procedure before EUIPO

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 3 February 2016 in Joined Cases R 3092/2014-2 and R 3118/2014-2

Contested decision

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

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

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs.

Pleas in law

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Articles 15, 51(1)(a), 57(1), 63(2), 64, 75, 76(2) and 77 of Regulation No 207/2009. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Articles 15, 51(1)(a), 57(1), 63(2), 64, 75, 76(2) and 77 of Regulation No 207/2009.

---
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Geology General

Filters

              - science_education(2)
              - science_faqs(32)
              - science_science(43)
              - products_data(30)
              - (-)products_maps(182)
              - products_publications(706)
              - multimedia_audio(154)
              - multimedia_audio-141766(144)
              - multimedia_audio-141767(10)
              - multimedia_image(92)
              - multimedia_image-141769(2)
              - multimedia_image-141771(73)
              - multimedia_image-141772(3)
              - multimedia_image-141774(1)
              - multimedia_image-141775(12)
              - multimedia_image-141776(1)
              - multimedia_video(312)
              - multimedia_video-149194(183)
              - multimedia_video-149195(44)
              - multimedia_video-149196(2)
              - multimedia_video-149197(24)
              - multimedia_video-149198(22)
              - multimedia_video-149225(3)
              - documents_file(5)
              - documents_file-149204(1)
              - documents_file-149213(1)
              - documents_file-149215(1)
              - documents_file-149218(1)
              - documents_file-149219(1)
              - news_news-149249(1)
              - news_newsletters(1)
              - connect_staff_profiles(6)
              - other_basic-42(15)

## By Location

              - alaska(15)
              - arizona(1)
              - arkansas(1)
              - california(11)
              - colorado(10)
              - connecticut(1)
              - idaho(1)
              - kansas(1)
              - kentucky(1)
              - maine(2)
              - massachusetts(1)
              - missouri(2)
              - montana(3)
              - nevada(7)
              - new mexico(6)
              - new york(1)
              - north dakota(1)
              - oklahoma(1)
              - pennsylvania(3)
              - rhode island(1)
              - south dakota(3)
              - texas(1)
              - utah(14)
              - virginia(1)
              - wyoming(1)

## By Year

map        November 1, 2013        Geologic map of the Mount Sherman 7.5' quadrangle, Lake and Park Counties, Colorado

map        June 2, 2005        Geologic map of Cydonia Mensae - southern Acidalia Planitia, Mars, quadrangles MTM 40007, 40012, 40017, 45007, 45012, and 45017

#### Pagination

-  First page« First 
-  Previous page‹‹ 
-                Page            1 
-                Page            2 
-                Page            3 
-                Page            4 
-                Page            5 
-                Page            6 
-                Current page            7
# C_2019004EN.01000802.xml

| 7.1.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 4/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.1.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 4/8

---

Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 25 October 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Vrhovno sodišče — Slovenia) — Milan Božičevič Ježovnik v Republika Slovenija

(Case C-528/17) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Article 143(1)(d) - Exemption from import VAT - Importation followed by an intra-Community supply - Risk of tax evasion - Good faith of the taxable importer and supplier - Assessment - Duty of care of the taxable importer and supplier)

(2019/C 4/11)

Language of the case: Slovene

Referring court

Vrhovno sodišče

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Milan Božičevič Ježovnik

Defendant: Republika Slovenija

Operative part of the judgment

Article 143(1)(d) of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, as amended by Council Directive 2009/69/EC of 25 June 2009, must be interpreted to the effect that, in circumstances where the taxable importer and supplier benefitted from an exemption from import value added tax on the basis of an authorisation issued after a prior examination by the competent customs authorities in the light of the evidence provided by that taxable person, the latter is not required to pay value added tax after the event where it is revealed, during a subsequent examination, that the substantive conditions for the exemption had not been met, except where it is established, in the light of objective evidence, that that taxable person knew, or should have known, that the supplies subsequent to the imports at issue were involved in fraud committed by the customer and that he did not take all reasonable steps in his power to avoid that fraud, which is a matter for the referring court to determine.

---

(1)  OJ C 374, 6.11.2017.

---
**d.2**
**Sarbanes-Oxley Section 302 Certification**
I, John Kalman, certify that:
1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of Enterra Energy Trust;
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport;
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 company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4. The company’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) forthe company and have:
(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;
(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the company’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand 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 company’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the company’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and
5. The company’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluationof internal control over financial reporting, to the company’s auditors and the audit committee ofthe company’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe company’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 havea significant role in the company’s internal control over financial reporting.
Date: July 14, 2005
/s/ John Kalman
OFFICE OF THE STANDING CHAPTER 13 TRUSTEE

105 Decker Ct

Suite 1150 11th Floor

Irving, TX 75062

(214) 855-9200

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

IN RE:

WILLIE CURNELL

CASE No: 24-31344-SGJ-13

NOTICE OF INSUFFICIENT CREDITOR ADDRESS

Please be advised that the following creditor(s) have been listed on either the Mailing Matrix or 

Preliminary Plan with insufficient addresses:

1 VISION HOSTING

The creditor(s) will not be entered as creditors in the Trustee's system until an Amended Mailing Matrix 

listing their complete address has been filed with the Court.

It will be necessary for you to serve the parties all filed documents and file a certificate of service with the 

Bankruptcy Court.

Creditors who do not receive adequate Notice under Bankruptcy Rules may not be discharged.

By: /s/ Thomas D. Powers

Thomas D. Powers, Chapter 13 Trustee

State Bar No. 16218700

Case 24-31344-sgj13 Doc 20 Filed 06/06/24 Entered 06/06/24 12:01:37 Desc Main

Document Page 1 of 2
Notice of Insufficient Creditor Address

Case # 24-31344-SGJ-13

WILLIE CURNELL

Certificate of Service

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing "Notice of Insufficient Creditor Address" was served on the following 

parties at the addresses listed below by United States First Class Mail or via electronic mail. 

Debtor: WILLIE CURNELL, 1990 OAK HILL CIRCLE, DALLAS, TX 75217

Attorney: THE REED LAW GROUP PLLC, 3245 W MAIN ST, 235-346, FRISCO, TX 75034

**Indicates party has elected to receive all notifications via electronic service and was not served a copy via United States First 

Class Mail.

Dated: 06/06/2024 By: /s/ Thomas D. Powers

Thomas D. Powers, Chapter 13 Trustee

State Bar No. 16218700

Case 24-31344-sgj13 Doc 20 Filed 06/06/24 Entered 06/06/24 12:01:37 Desc Main

Document Page 2 of 2