alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

WACO DIVISION

WSOU INVESTMENTS, LLC

d/b/aBRAZOS LICENSING 

AND DEVELOPMENT,

Plaintiff,

v.

DELL TECHNOLOGIES INC., 

DELL INC., EMC CORPORATION, 

and VMWARE, INC.

Defendant.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20-CV-00473-ADA

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20-CV-00475-ADA

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20-CV-00476-ADA

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20-CV-00477-ADA

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20-CV-00480-ADA

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20-CV-00481-ADA

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20-CV-00482-ADA

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20-CV-00485-ADA

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20-CV-00486-ADA

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

ORDER REGARDING DISCOVERY DISPUTES

This Court, having considered disputes raised by Plaintiff WSOU Investments, LLC d/b/a 

Brazos Licensing and Development (“Plaintiff”) and Defendants Dell Technologies Inc., Dell Inc., 

EMC Corporation, and VMWare, Inc. (collectively, “Defendants”) during the March 11, 2022, 

Discovery Hearing, hereby ORDERS the following:

1. Defendants’ request to compel documents regarding Plaintiff’s offers to sell or

license the patents-in-suit, including pre-suit offers to license or sell the patents-in-suit by thirdparty AQUA, is DENIED;

2. Defendants’ request to compel Plaintiff to provide a privilege log is DENIED. 

Defendants’ request to compel Plaintiff to log any pre-suit investigation, or other infringement or 

technical analysis is DENIED. Neither party is required to search or log emails or email 

attachments, including, with respect to Plaintiff, emails and email attachments regarding any presuit investigation, or other infringement or technical analysis;

Case 6:20-cv-00473-ADA Document 167 Filed 03/21/22 Page 1 of 2
1 

3. Plaintiff’s request to compel Defendants to produce source code for all functions

listed in the submitted dispute chart and referenced in the produced source code for U.S. Patent 

Nos. 7,443,888 (6:20-cv-00475-ADA), 9,164,800 (6:20-cv-00481-ADA) and 7,092,360 (6:20-cv00486-ADA) is GRANTED. 

4. Plaintiff’s request to compel Defendants to produce source code on products

accused of infringing U.S. Patent Nos. 9,137,144 (6:20-cv-00473-ADA), 7,565,435 (6:20-cv00476-ADA) and 7,424,020 (6:20-cv-00482-ADA) is DENIED. 

5. Plaintiff’s request for relief from the stipulated schedule to serve subpoenas on

third-party chipmakers to produce source code on products accused of infringing U.S. Patent Nos. 

9,137,144 (6:20-cv-00473-ADA), 7,565,435 (6:20-cv-00476-ADA) and 7,424,020 (6:20-cv00482-ADA) is GRANTED. 

Signed this 21st day of March, 2022. 

____________________________________ 

HON. ALAN D ALBRIGHT 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 6:20-cv-00473-ADA Document 167 Filed 03/21/22 Page 2 of 2
|                                                                                                                     
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                                     
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                                       
|View History: Annual                                                                                                 
|View History: Annual                                                                                                 
|View History:                                                                                                        
|                                                                                                                     
|Pennsylvania Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Reserves Divestitures (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                                     
|                                                                                                                     
|Pennsylvania Associated-Dissolved Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Reserves Divestitures (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                                     

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 3      | 1      | 4      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0     
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 0      | 106    | 0      | 0     
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 29     | 0      |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AUSTIN DIVISION

AL C. TOOKS,

 Petitioner

v.

SHERIFF OF COUNTY OF KIMBLE,

TEXAS,

 Defendant

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

A-20-CV-537-RP-SH

ORDER

Before the Court is Petitioner Al C. Tooks’ “Petition Pursuant All Writs Act for Issuance of 

Writ of Habeas Corpus Ad Subjiciendum,” filed May 18, 2020 (Dkt. 1). Petitioner is currently in 

custody at FCI- Fort Dix, in Joint Base MDL, New Jersey. 

Petitioner has failed to pay the applicable $5.00 filing fee, or file an application to proceed in 

forma pauperis. It is therefore ORDERED that the Clerk shall forward to Petitioner an application 

to proceed in forma pauperis and that Petitioner, within thirty (30) days of the filing of this Order, 

must submit either the filing fee of $5.00 or a completed application to proceed in forma pauperis. 

Failure to comply with the Court’s order may result in the dismissal of this case for want of 

prosecution.

SIGNED on May 20, 2020.

SUSAN HIGHTOWER

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case 1:20-cv-00537-RP-SH Document 3 Filed 05/20/20 Page 1 of 1
### Page 1 of 3 **Disposition Comments Docket No:**  

### FAA - 201 4 - 045 1 These comments are in **Directorate ID:** 

### 201 3 -NM - 1 22 - AD response to an SNPRM Originating Office Tracking No.: 

### 120L/2668/13 **Next Step:** FRAN SNPRM 

### N o C omments/Only

Supportive Comments Received

– If this box is checked, no signatures are required. No 

### Has the reference d service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? I f yes, list latest revision and attach a cop y. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance. Instructions: Summarize all comments **by iss ue**  (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of each issue. **All comments relating to the sam e issue should be discussed together.**  Do not list all of the issues from one commenter together. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA - IR - M - 8040.1C Chapter 9. **ISSUE 1:** Select one o

f the following : If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because

Make the following changes to the AD: If **NO** , we don’t agree because **ISSUE 2**  **:** Select one of the following :

If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree w ith because We disagree with because Make the following changes to the AD:

### Page 2 of 3

If **NO** , we don’t agree because **For additional issues, do uble**  **- click**  **here**

### Page 3 of 3 **S ignature Section**  Signature indicates concurrence with this action. Originating Office Tracking No.: **ASE** Printed Name **: Date** 

**Branch Man ager**  **Date**
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5202 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5202

           To suspend temporarily the duty on certain PCBTF.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 27, 2012

 Mr. Mulvaney introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
           To suspend temporarily the duty on certain PCBTF.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN PCBTF.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``     9902.01.00        1-Chloro-4-         Free            No change      No change      On or before     ''.
                          (trifluoromethyl)                                                 12/31/2015
                          benzene (CAS No.
                          98-56-6)
                          containing no
                          additives
                          (provided for in
                          subheading
                          2903.99.08)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                          25,663
<SECURITIES>                                    12,440
<RECEIVABLES>                                  258,169
<ALLOWANCES>                                    12,170
<INVENTORY>                                    264,966
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               581,964
<PP&E>                                         312,206
<DEPRECIATION>                                 157,528
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,005,438
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          326,646
<BONDS>                                         95,095
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        21,034
<OTHER-SE>                                     459,476
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,005,438
<SALES>                                        356,624
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               356,624
<CGS>                                          215,653
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  215,653
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                10,443
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   952
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,162
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (12,827)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (4,832)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (7,995)<F1>
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (7,995)<F1>
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.38)<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.38)<F1>
<FN>
<F1>Excluding a net after-tax charge of $26.9 million ($1.27 per diluted share)
from patent litigation and an after-tax gain of $4.2 million ($.20 per diluted
share) from a divestiture by Cylink Corporation, a 29 percent owned affiliate
of the Company, net income would have been $14.7 million ($.69 per diluted
share).
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with this Amendment No. 1 to the Quarterly Report of The Colonial BancGroup, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period
ended June 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report) and to which this certification is furnished as an exhibit, I, Sarah H. Moore, the principal financial officer of the Company,
certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) 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 operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date: February 13, 2006



|                                      
|--------------------------------------
|/s/    SARAH H. MOORE                 
|Sarah H. Moore Chief Financial Officer



A signed original of
this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to The Colonial BancGroup, Inc. and will be retained by The Colonial BancGroup, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
<PAGE>

                                  EXHIBIT 23.1

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form
S-3 No. 333-109597) of Newcastle Investment Corporation and in the related
Prospectus of our reports dated March 3, 2005, with respect to the consolidated
financial statements of Newcastle Investment Corporation, Newcastle Investment
Corporations' management's assessment of the effectiveness of internal control
over financial reporting, and the effectiveness of internal control over
financial reporting of Newcastle Investment Corporation, included in this Annual
Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2004.

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

New York, New York
March 16, 2005
**Exhibit 31.1.1**

*** Certification pursuant to Section 302 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 for GSWC***

I, Floyd E. Wicks,certify that:

1)              I have reviewed thisquarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2007 of GoldenState Water Company (referred to as “GSWC”);

2)              Based on myknowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3)              Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of GSWC as of, and for, theperiods presented in this report;

4)              GSWC’s othercertifying 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)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for GSWC and have:

a)              designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to GSWC, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is madeknown to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;

b)             evaluated the effectivenessof GSWC’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report ourconclusions 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 thisreport any change in GSWC’s internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred during GSWC’s most recent fiscal quarter (GSWC’s fourth fiscal quarterin the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, GSWC’s internal control over financial reporting.

5)              GSWC’s othercertifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation ofinternal control over financial reporting, to the GSWC’s auditors and the auditcommittee of GSWC’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunction):

a)              all significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the GSWC’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and

b)             any fraud, whether ornot material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in GSWC’s internal controls over financial reporting.

 
| Dated: August 9, 2007 | By:    | /s/ FLOYD E. WICKS      |   |
|-----------------------|--------|-------------------------|--------|
|                  |   | Floyd E. Wicks          |
|                  |   | Chief Executive Officer |

 

1

----
|                                                                                                        
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                        
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                          
|View History: Annual                                                                                    
|View History: Annual                                                                                    
|View History:                                                                                           
|                                                                                                        
|Lower 48 States Nonassociated Natural Gas, Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs, Wet (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                        
|                                                                                                        
|Lower 48 States Nonassociated Natural Gas, Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs, Wet (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                        

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0  | Year-1  | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4  | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7  | Year-8 | Year-9 
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------- | ------- | ------ | ------ | ------- | ------ | ------ | ------- | ------ | -------
|1990's                                                                                                                            |         |         |        |        |         |        | 27,691 | 27,294  | 30,073 | 30,539 
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 37,068  | 45,737  | 42,831 | 42,474 | 45,332  | 52,845 | 60,330 | 70,887  | 78,632 | 90,304 
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 104,109 | 104,676 | 90,512 | 93,344 | 120,136 | 78,855 | 80,481 | 125,095 | 14,417 | 137,974
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 104,450 | 12,654  |        |        |         |        |        |         |        |        
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-7533

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

GUY PRESTON HALE, JR.,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern

District of West Virginia, at Charleston. John T. Copenhaver, Jr.,

District Judge. (2:02-cr-00172-ALL; 2:04-cv-01037)

Submitted: March 29, 2007 Decided: April 3, 2007

Before MOTZ, TRAXLER, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Guy Preston Hale, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Philip Henry Wright,

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Charleston, West Virginia,

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Guy Preston Hale, Jr., seeks to appeal the district

court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge

and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. The

order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a

certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A

certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial

showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any

assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is

debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by

the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell,

537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484

(2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have

independently reviewed the record and conclude that Hale has not

made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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