alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Designation of Officials of the United States Agency for Global Media To Act as Chief Executive Officer

# Memorandum for the Chief Executive Officer of the United States Agency for Global Media

                    By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, including the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998, as amended, 5 U.S.C. 3345*et seq*. (the “Act”), it is hereby ordered that:                

**Section 1**                    .                     *Order of Succession*. Subject to the provisions of section 2 of this memorandum, and to the limitations set forth in the Act, the following officials of the United States Agency for Global Media (USAGM), in the order listed, shall act as and perform the functions and duties of the office of the Chief Executive Officer of USAGM (CEO) during any period in which the CEO has died, resigned, or otherwise become unable to perform the functions and duties of the office of CEO:                

(a) Director, Voice of America;

(b) General Counsel; 

(c) Chief Financial Officer; and

(d) Chief Management Officer. 

**Sec. 2**                    .                     *Exceptions*. (a) No individual who is serving in an office listed in section 1 of this memorandum in an acting capacity shall, by virtue of so serving, act as CEO pursuant to this memorandum.                

(b) No individual who is serving in an office listed in section 1 of this memorandum shall act as CEO unless that individual is otherwise eligible to so serve under the Act.

(c) Notwithstanding the provisions of this memorandum, the President retains discretion, to the extent permitted by law, to depart from this memorandum in designating an acting CEO.

**Sec. 3**                    .                     *General Provisions*. (a) Nothing in this memorandum shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:                

(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This memorandum shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This memorandum is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

                    (d) You are authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the                     *Federal Register*.                

[FR Doc. 2025-00674

Billing code 8610-01-P
R.O., Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. DEPT. OF CHILDREN & FAMILIES, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D19-0169

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

May 2, 2019

BY ORDER OF THE COURT:

Because R. O. has failed to serve an initial brief as provided by this court's order of March 19, 2019, this appeal is dismissed for failure to prosecute.

VILLANTI, SALARIO, and ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, JJ., Concur.
I 

119TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 31 

To make the assault of a law enforcement officer a deportable offense, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 3, 2025 

Mr. GARBARINO (for himself, Mrs. HOUCHIN, Ms. TENNEY, Ms. 

MALLIOTAKIS, Mr. FEENSTRA, and Mr. NUNN of Iowa) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To make the assault of a law enforcement officer a 

deportable offense, 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 ‘‘Protect Our Law en5 forcement with Immigration Control and Enforcement Act 

6 of 2025’’ or the ‘‘POLICE Act of 2025’’. 

7 SEC. 2. ASSAULT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER. 

8 Section 237(a)(2) of the Immigration and Nationality 

9 Act (8 U.S.C. 1227(a)(2)) is amended by adding at the 

10 end the following: 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 31 IH

1 ‘‘(G) ASSAULT OF LAW ENFORCEMENT OF2 FICER.— 

3 ‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—Any alien who has 

4 been convicted of, who admits having com5 mitted, or who admits committing acts 

6 which constitute the essential elements of, 

7 any offense involving assault of a law en8 forcement officer is deportable. 

9 ‘‘(ii) CIRCUMSTANCES.—The cir10 cumstances referred to in clause (i) are 

11 that the law enforcement officer was as12 saulted— 

13 ‘‘(I) while he or she was engaged 

14 in the performance of his or her offi15 cial duties; 

16 ‘‘(II) because of the performance 

17 of his or her official duties; or 

18 ‘‘(III) because of his or her sta19 tus as a law enforcement officer. 

20 ‘‘(iii) DEFINITIONS.—In this subpara21 graph— 

22 ‘‘(I) the term ‘assault’ has the 

23 meaning given that term in the juris24 diction where the act occurred; and 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•HR 31 IH

1 ‘‘(II) the term ‘law enforcement 

2 officer’ is a person authorized by 

3 law— 

4 ‘‘(aa) to engage in or super5 vise the prevention, detention, in6 vestigation, or prosecution, or the 

7 incarceration of any person for 

8 any criminal violation of law; 

9 ‘‘(bb) to apprehend, arrest, 

10 or prosecute an individual for 

11 any criminal violation of law; or 

12 ‘‘(cc) to be a firefighter or 

13 other first responder.’’. 

14 SEC. 3. REPORT ON ALIENS DEPORTED FOR ASSAULTING A 

15 LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER. 

16 On an annual basis, the Secretary of Homeland Secu17 rity shall submit to Congress and make publicly available 

18 on the website of the Department of Homeland Security 

19 a report on the number of aliens who were deported during 

20 the previous year under section 237(a)(2)(G) of the Immi21 gration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1227(a)(2)(G)). 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
Clayton Paul BATEMAN v. STATE of Mississippi

2016-CT-01353-COA

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Filed: February 26, 2019 Closed: April 18, 2019

Motion Desc: Petition for Writ of Certiorari.

Certiorari - Denied.
FIL ED U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S EL EVENTHCI RCUI T J UNE 19, 2009 THOMAS K. KAH

N CL ERK [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELE VENTH CIRCUIT

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ No. 0 8- 15 41 4 Non -Arg um en t Ca le nd ar

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ D.C. Dock etNo. 0 5- 00 47 7- CR-C C-5 -1 UNITED STAT ES OF AMERIC A, Pl ai nt iff -Ap pe ll ee, ve rs us SERGIO BEJ ARANO, a.k .a. Serg io , a.k .a. In gi ne ro , Defen da nt -Ap pe ll an t.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

th e Uni te d S tate s Di st ric t Co urt fo r th e North ernDis tri ctof Ge or gi a

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ (Jun e 1 9, 2 00 9) Befo re BLACK, MAR CUS an d F AY, Circ ui t J ud ge s PER CURI AM: Mary Erick so n, ap po in te d c ou ns el forSerg io Bejaran o i n thi s d ire ct cri m in al ap pe al , has m ov edto withdraw fro m furth er re pr es en ta ti onof t heap pe ll an t an d fi le d abri ef p ur su an t t o An de rs v. Ca li fo rn ia , 38 6 U.S. 7 38 , 87 S.Ct .

13 96 , 18 L.Ed.2d49 3 (1 96 7) . Our i nd ep en de ntrev ie w of the en ti re re co rdrev eal s th atco un se l’s as se ss m en t o f th e rel at iv e m eri t o f th e ap pe al is co rrec t. Bec au se in de pe nd en t ex am in at io n o f th e en ti re rec or d re ve al s n o arg uabl e is su es of m eri t, co un se l’s m ot io n t o wi th dr aw is GRANTED , andBejaran o’s co nv ic ti on an d se nt en ce ar e AFFIRMED . Bejaran o’s m ot io n fo r ap po in tm en t o f co un se l o n ap pe al is DENIE D AS MOOT .

2
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.
 Department of Justice
 On January 8, 2025, the Department of Justice lodged a proposed modification to Stipulated Order No. 1 that was entered in 2009 by the United States District Court for the Northern Mariana Islands in the lawsuit entitled 
                    *United States*
                     v. 
                    *Commonwealth Utilities Corp. et al.,*
                     Civil Action No. 08-cv-0051 (dkt. No. 14). Stipulated Order No. 1 requires the Commonwealth Utilities Corporation (CUC) to undertake certain measures to address violations of the Clean Water Act (CWA), 33 U.S.C. 1311 
                    *et seq.*
                     and Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), 42 U.S.C. 300f. 
                    *et seq.*
                     with respect to its wastewater treatment and drinking water systems. An EPA inspection in December of 2023 found deficiencies in CUC's operation and maintenance of its drinking water system. The proposed modification requires CUC to correct these deficiencies and undertake certain measures to ensure future compliance with the CWA and SDWA. The publication of this notice opens a period for public comment on the proposed modification. Comments should be addressed to the Assistant Attorney General, Environment and Natural Resources Division, and should refer to 
                    *United States*
                     v. 
                    *Commonwealth Utilities Corp.*
                     D.J. Ref. No. 90-5-1-1-08471. All comments must be submitted no later than thirty (30) days after the publication date of this notice. Comments may be submitted either by email or by mail: *To submit comments:*
*Send them to:*By email
*pubcomment-ees.enrd@usdoj.gov*.By mail
Assistant Attorney General, U.S. DOJ—ENRD, P.O. Box 7611, Washington, DC 20044-7611.
 Any comments submitted in writing may be filed in whole or in part on the public court docket without further notice to the commenter. During the public comment period, the Consent Decree may be examined and downloaded at this Justice Department website: 
                    *https://www.justice.gov/​enrd/​consent-decrees.*
                     If you require assistance accessing Consent Decree, you may request assistance by email or by mail to the addresses provided above for submitting comments. Scott Bauer, Assistant Section Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment and Natural Resources Division.


[FR Doc. 2025-00686 Filed 1-14-25; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-15-P
Case 3:03-cv-01682-B Document 17 Filed 11/14/03 Page 1 of 21 PageID 82
Case 3:03-cv-01682-B Document 17 Filed 11/14/03 Page 2 of 21 PageID 83
Case 3:03-cv-01682-B Document 17 Filed 11/14/03 Page 3 of 21 PageID 84
Case 3:03-cv-01682-B Document 17 Filed 11/14/03 Page 4 of 21 PageID 85
Case 3:03-cv-01682-B Document 17 Filed 11/14/03 Page 5 of 21 PageID 86
Case 3:03-cv-01682-B Document 17 Filed 11/14/03 Page 6 of 21 PageID 87
Case 3:03-cv-01682-B Document 17 Filed 11/14/03 Page 7 of 21 PageID 88
Case 3:03-cv-01682-B Document 17 Filed 11/14/03 Page 8 of 21 PageID 89
Case 3:03-cv-01682-B Document 17 Filed 11/14/03 Page 9 of 21 PageID 90
Case 3:03-cv-01682-B Document 17 Filed 11/14/03 Page 10 of 21 PageID 91
Case 3:03-cv-01682-B Document 17 Filed 11/14/03 Page 11 of 21 PageID 92
Case 3:03-cv-01682-B Document 17 Filed 11/14/03 Page 12 of 21 PageID 93
Case 3:03-cv-01682-B Document 17 Filed 11/14/03 Page 13 of 21 PageID 94
Case 3:03-cv-01682-B Document 17 Filed 11/14/03 Page 14 of 21 PageID 95
Case 3:03-cv-01682-B Document 17 Filed 11/14/03 Page 15 of 21 PageID 96
Case 3:03-cv-01682-B Document 17 Filed 11/14/03 Page 16 of 21 PageID 97
Case 3:03-cv-01682-B Document 17 Filed 11/14/03 Page 17 of 21 PageID 98
Case 3:03-cv-01682-B Document 17 Filed 11/14/03 Page 18 of 21 PageID 99
Case 3:03-cv-01682-B Document 17 Filed 11/14/03 Page 19 of 21 PageID 100
Case 3:03-cv-01682-B Document 17 Filed 11/14/03 Page 20 of 21 PageID 101
Case 3:03-cv-01682-B Document 17 Filed 11/14/03 Page 21 of 21 PageID 102
EXHIBIT 32


                                  CERTIFICATION

     In connection with the Annual Report of Bravo Resource Partners Ltd. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended July 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), we, Tyrone
R. Carter, the Chief Executive Officer and Tamela Miller-Carlson, the Principal
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to
the best of our knowledge:

(1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
     of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
     respects the financial condition and results of the Company.

Date:  June 20, 2005
                         By:  /s/ Tyrone R. Carter
                              --------------------------------------------------
                              Tyrone R. Carter, Chief  Executive Officer


                              /s/ Tamela Miller-Carlson
                              --------------------------------------------------
                              Tamela Miller-Carlson, Principal Financial Officer
# C_2019035EN.01000701.xml

| 28.1.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 35/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.1.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 35/7

---

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 29 November 2018 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof — Germany) — Finanzamt Goslar v baumgarten sports & more GmbH

(Case C-548/17) (1)

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Taxation - Value added tax (VAT) - Taxation of professional football player agencies - Payment by instalments and subject to a condition - Chargeable event, chargeability and collection of the tax))

(2019/C 35/09)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesfinanzhof

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Finanzamt Goslar

Defendant: baumgarten sports & more GmbH

Operative part of the judgment

Article 63 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, read in conjunction with Article 64(1) thereof, must be interpreted as precluding the chargeable event and chargeability of a tax on the supply of agency services for professional football players by an agent, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, paid in conditional instalments over several years further to the placement, from being regarded as occurring or taking effect when the player is placed.

---

(1)  OJ C 437, 18.12.2017.

---
```

[Congressional Bills 119th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 133 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

119th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 133

      To prohibit a moratorium on the use of hydraulic fracturing.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 3, 2025

 Ms. Boebert introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
  Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on 
Energy and Commerce, 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 a moratorium on the use of hydraulic fracturing.

    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 ``Protecting American Energy 
Production Act''.

SEC. 2. PROTECTING AMERICAN ENERGY PRODUCTION.

    (a) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of Congress that States 
should maintain primacy for the regulation of hydraulic fracturing for 
oil and natural gas production on State and private lands.
    (b) Prohibition on Declaration of a Moratorium on Hydraulic 
Fracturing.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the President 
may not declare a moratorium on the use of hydraulic fracturing unless 
such moratorium is authorized by an Act of Congress.
                                 <all>
```
Lorenzo A. ALLEN, Appellant, v. HABITAT II CONDOMINIUM, INC., a Florida not-for-profit corporation, Appellee.

No. 4D18-1517

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[March 27, 2019]

Lorenzo A. Allen, Parkland, pro se.

Tara N. Mulrey of Katzman Chandler, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.

Per Curiam.

Lorenzo A. Allen appeals an order denying in part his Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540 motion to vacate a foreclosure judgment and to set aside the sale. He argues the judgment is void because he did not have notice of the final hearing. He also argues that the trial court erred in denying his rule 1.540 motion without an evidentiary hearing. We agree that he is entitled to an evidentiary hearing.

Habitat II Condominium, Inc. (Habitat) filed a complaint against Allen and other owners of a condominium to foreclose a lien for $ 3,460 in unpaid assessments. Allen was served with the complaint by substitute service on his daughter at his residence. He did not answer. Habitat moved for default and, later, summary judgment. The motions and the notices of hearing were mailed to a different address. Allen did not appear at the final hearing, the trial court entered a foreclosure judgment, and the property was sold.

*441Just over a year after the final judgment, Allen filed a verified rule 1.540 motion arguing that his due process rights were violated by mailing the motions and notices of hearing to the wrong address, which rendered the judgment void. Without holding an evidentiary hearing, the trial court denied the motion in part, simply stating that the judgment stands, but a hearing will be set as to amounts. The order does not include any findings or any explanation.

On appeal Allen argues that the judgment was void and the court erred in denying his rule 1.540 motion without an evidentiary hearing. Habitat did not file an answer brief.

"It is well settled that a judgment entered without notice to a party is void." *Taylor v. Taylor* , 67 So.3d 359, 362 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (quoting *Watson v. Watson* , 583 So.2d 410 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991) ); *see also* *Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Michaels* , 166 So.3d 226, 227 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015) ; *Touloute v. City of Fort Lauderdale* , 80 So.3d 1129 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012).

Allen's motion stated a colorable claim of entitlement to relief and should not have been denied without an evidentiary hearing. *See* *Jones v. Gov't Employees Ins. Co.* , 192 So.3d 614, 615 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) ; *Schuman v. Int'l Consumer Corp.* , 50 So.3d 75, 77 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010).

Accordingly, we reverse and remand for an evidentiary hearing on Allen's claim that he did not have notice of the final hearing.

*Reversed and remanded.*

Gerber, C.J., Taylor and Conner, JJ., concur.
NO. 07-01-0225-CV

	IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

	FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	AT AMARILLO

	PANEL D

	JULY 16, 2001

	______________________________

	IN THE INTEREST OF ANTHONY ATWOOD, A CHILD

	_________________________________

	FROM THE 286TH DISTRICT COURT OF HOCKLEY COUNTY;

	NO. 13372; HONORABLE ANDY KUPPER, JUDGE

	_______________________________

Before BOYD, C.J., and QUINN and REAVIS, JJ.

	Danny Atwood, appellant, challenges the judgment of the trial court reducing unpaid child support to judgment and rendering judgment against him and in favor of the Attorney General in the amount of $20,195.73, with interest and costs.  Presenting three issues, Atwood contends that 1) the order is void because no service of citation was perfected on him, 2) the citation purporting to serve him shows on its face that the return of citation was defective, and 3) he is entitled to a new trial because through no fault of his, he is deprived of an effective appeal because no record of the proceedings was made.   For the reason explained below, the judgment will be reversed and the proceeding remanded to the trial court for a new trial.

	According to the judgment signed April 5, 2001, Atwood did not appear in person or by attorney at the hearing and a record of the proceedings was not made. By letter brief, citing In the Interest of Vega, 10 S.W.3d 720, 722-23 (Tex.App.--Amarillo 1999, no pet.), the Attorney General candidly acknowledges that as presented in Atwood’s third issue, the judgment must be reversed because no record was made of the trial court proceeding. Atwood’s third issue is sustained.

	Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is reversed and the proceeding is remanded for a new trial.

							Don H. Reavis

						    	     Justice

Do not publish.
# C_2017053EN.01004401.xml

| 20.2.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 53/44 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.2.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 53/44

---

Action brought on 23 December 2016 — Hesse v EUIPO — Wedl & Hofmann (TESTA ROSSA)

(Case T-910/16)

(2017/C 053/53)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Kurt Hesse (Nuremberg, Germany) (represented by: M. Krogmann, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Wedl & Hofmann GmbH (Mils/Hall in Tirol, Austria)

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 figurative mark containing the word elements ‘TESTA ROSSA’ –EU trade mark No 7 070 519

Trade mark at issue:

Proceedings before EUIPO: Revocation proceedings

Proceedings before EUIPO

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 5 October 2016 in Case R 68/2016-1

Contested decision

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision and also declare EU trade mark No 7 070 519 revoked in respect of the following goods:
  Class 21 — Household and kitchen containers; Glassware, Porcelain, in particular tableware; Glass beverage ware;
  Class 25 — Clothing, namely aprons, shirts, polo shirts and t-shirts; Headgear; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision and also declare EU trade mark No 7 070 519 revoked in respect of the following goods:

Class 21 — Household and kitchen containers; Glassware, Porcelain, in particular tableware; Glass beverage ware;

Class 25 — Clothing, namely aprons, shirts, polo shirts and t-shirts; Headgear;

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

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs.

Plea in law

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 51(1)(a) of Regulation No 207/2009.

---