alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### GIACONA v. STATE.

No. 23857;

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Jan. 14, 1948.

No appearance for appellant.

A. C. Winborn, Cr. Dist. Atty., and E. T. Branch, Asst. Cr. Dist. Atty., both of Houston, and Ernest S. Goens, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

GRAVES, Judge.

Appellant was duly charged with an attempt to commit burglary, and it was also alleged in such charge that he had been theretofore convicted of a like or similar offense. In other words, he was charged as a second offender. His punishment was assessed at confinement in the state penitentiary for a period of four years.

There are no bills of exception found in the record.

From the facts we gather that two police officers in the city of Houston were driving at nighttime near Mr. Barnett’s store which was located at 3802 Barnett Street. Their attention was attracted to a pick-up automobile parked nearby. Upon an inspection of the Barnett store, they saw a man, identified by both officers, as appellant, on top of this store building. When the light from a flashlight was placed upon him, the man jumped from the building and fled. As he leaped from the building, the'officers heard a sound as of metals striking something. Appellant escaped but the officers, remaining near the scene, apprehended him some forty-five minutes thereafter. They found certain tools useful in breaking into buildings, and on top of the Barnett store they found a screw driver near a point where the composition roof of the store had been torn and lifted up, which torn place was of recent origin. No testimony was offered by appellant.

The trial court instructed the jury that before they could convict appellant, they must believe beyond a reasonable doubt that he was guilty of this attempted burglary, and also that he was the same person who had been previously convicted of burglary *404in cause No. 46,067 in the Criminal District Court of Harris County, Texas. Upon their verdict finding such facts to have been shown, the trial court sentenced appellant to a term of four years in the penitentiary. This procedure seems to be in accord with the doctrine laid down in Gerard v. State, 91 Tex.Cr.R. 374, 238 S.W. 924, and as authorized by Article 62 P.C.

Believing this case to have been properly tried in the court below, and no error appearing in the record, the judgment will be affirmed.
TXWD - Supplement to JS 44 (Rev. 9/2019) Page 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

 DIVISION 

Supplement to JS 44 Civil Cover Sheet

Cases Removed from State District Court

This form must be filed with the Clerk's Office no later than the first business

following the filing of the Notice of Removal. Additional sheets may be used as necessary.

The attorney of record for the removing party sign this form.

: 

1. Please identify the court from which the case is being removed; the case number; and the 

complete style of the case. 

2. Was jury demand made in State Court? Yes No 

If yes, by which party and on what date? 

Party Name Date 

TION: 

1. List all plaintiffs, defendants, and intervenors still remaining in the case. Also, please list the 

attorney(s) of record for each party named and include the attorney's firm name, correct mailing address, 

telephone number, and fax number (including area codes). 

2. List all parties that have not been served at the time of the removal, and the reason(s) for non-service. 

Case 5:20-cv-00646 Document 1-6 Filed 05/29/20 Page 1 of 3
TXWD - Supplement to JS 44 (Rev. 9/2019) Page 2

3. List all parties that have been non-suited, dismissed, or terminated, and the reason(s) for their 

removal from the case.

- - : 

1. List separately each counterclaim, cross-claim, or third-party claim still remaining in the case and 

designate the nature of each such claim. For each counterclaim, cross-claim, or third-party claim, include 

all plaintiffs, defendants, and intervenors still remaining in the case. Also, please list the attorney(s) of 

record for each party named and include the attorney's firm name, correct mailing address, telephone 

number, and fax number (including area codes). 

VERIFICATION: 

Attorney for Removing Party Date 

Party/Parties 

(NOTE: Additional comment space is available on page 3) 

Case 5:20-cv-00646 Document 1-6 Filed 05/29/20 Page 2 of 3
TXWD - Supplement to JS 44 (Rev. 9/2019) Page 3

ADDI : 

Case 5:20-cv-00646 Document 1-6 Filed 05/29/20 Page 3 of 3
## U nit edSta tes C ou rt o f A pp eal s For t h e Firs t C ircu it

No. 09-1196 IN RE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY AVERAGE WHOLESALE PRICE LITIGATION M. JOYCE HOWE, Plaintiff, Appellant,

v . LEROY TOWNSEND, Plaintiff, Appellee.
ERRATA SHEET The opinion of this Court issued on November 20, 2009, is amended as follows: On page 15, line 6, "January 16, 2006" should be "January 30, 2006".
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED JUNE 25, 2014

NO. 03-14-00082-CV

Johnathan Johnson, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM PROBATE COURT NO. 1 OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE JONES, JUSTICES PEMBERTON AND ROSE 

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION -- OPINION BY JUSTICE ROSE

This is an appeal from the order signed by the probate court on January 8, 2014. Having 

reviewed the record, it appears to the Court that Johnathan Johnson has not prosecuted his appeal

and did not comply with a notice from the clerk of this Court. Therefore, the Court dismisses the 

appeal for want of prosecution. Because appellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, no 

adjudication of costs is made.
**Exhibit 31.1**

** **

**CERTIFICATION**

** **

I, William Fox, certifythat:

 

1.               I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K,and all reports on Form 8-K containing distribution or servicing reportsfiled in respect of periods included in the year covered by this annual reportof Lehman ABS Corporation, on behalf of Corporate Backed Trust Certificates,News America Debenture-Backed Series 2002-9 Trust****(the“Trust”);

 

2.               Based on my knowledge, the information inthese reports, taken as a whole, does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading as of the last day of the period covered by this annual report;

 

3.               Based on my knowledge, the distributionor servicing information required to be provided to the Depositor by theTrustee under the pooling and servicing, or similar, agreement, for inclusionin these reports is included in these reports; and

 

4.               I am responsible for reviewing theactivities performed by the Depositor and the Trustee under the pooling andservicing, or similar, agreement and based upon my knowledge and the annualcompliance review required under that agreement, and except as disclosed in thereports, the Depositor and Trustee have each fulfilled its obligations underthat agreement.

 

In giving thecertifications above, I have reasonably relied on information provided to me bythe following unaffiliated party: U.S. Bank Trust National Association, asTrustee.

 

Date:  July 22, 2009

 

 
| By:    | /s/ William Fox                                                 |   |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Name:  | William Fox                                                     |   |
| Title: | Chief Financial  Officer, Controller and  Senior Vice President |   |

 

----
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

WACO DIVISION

WSOU INVESTMENTS, LLC d/b/a BRAZOS 

LICENSING AND DEVELOPMENT,

Plaintiff,

v.

DELL TECHNOLOGIES INC., DELL INC., 

EMC CORPORATION, AND VMWARE, INC.

Defendants.

Case No. 6:20-cv-00480-ADA

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

LETTER OF REQUEST FOR FOREIGN DISCOVERY

Case 6:20-cv-00480-ADA Document 47 Filed 11/06/20 Page 1 of 3
1

Defendants Dell Technologies Inc., Dell Inc., EMC Corporation, and VMware, Inc. 

(collectively “Defendants”) seek foreign discovery from third party witnesses residing in Finland.

Defendants have attached an Appendix with a Letter of Request which includes Document 

Requests and Deposition Topics. Defendants respectfully request that the Court execute the Letter 

of Request attached as Appendix E. Defendants further request that, after the Court has signed the 

Letter of Request, the Clerk of this Court authenticate the Court’s signature under the seal of this 

Court, and return the original signed and sealed executed Letter, and two certified copies of the 

signed and sealed executed Letters, to Defendants’ counsel, Barry K. Shelton, for delivery to the

proper authority.

Plaintiff, WSOU Investments, LLC d/b/a Brazos Licensing and Development, indicated 

that it reserves the right to serve its own foreign discovery in the future.

Dated: November 6, 2020 By: /s/ Barry K. Shelton

Barry K. Shelton

Texas State Bar No. 24055029

bshelton@sheltoncoburn.com

SHELTON COBURN LLP

311 RR 620, Ste. 205

Austin, TX 78734-4775 

Telephone: 512.263.2165

Facsimile: 512.263.2166 

Attorneys for Defendants

Case 6:20-cv-00480-ADA Document 47 Filed 11/06/20 Page 2 of 3
2

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that on November 6, 2020, all counsel of record who are deemed 

to have consented to electronic service are being served with a copy of this document through the 

Court’s CM/ECF system under Local Rule CV-5(b)(1). 

/s/ Barry K. Shelton

Barry K. Shelton

Case 6:20-cv-00480-ADA Document 47 Filed 11/06/20 Page 3 of 3
EXHIBIT 5 

Case 6:20-cv-00477-ADA Document 110-6 Filed 08/18/21 Page 1 of 3
Etheridge Law Group, PLLC

2600 East Southlake Blvd.

Suite 120 / 324

Southlake, Texas 76092

July 14, 2021

VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL

Brian A. Rosenthal

Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP

200 Park Avenue

New York, NY 10166

Brosenthal@gibsondunn.com

Re: WSOU Investments, LLC v. Dell Techs. Inc., EMC Corp., and VMware, Inc., Case 

Nos. 6:20-cv-00473; 6:20-cv-00474; 6:20-cv-00475; 6:20-cv-00476; 6:20-cv-00477; 

6:20-cv-00478; 6:20-cv-00479; 6:20-cv-00482; 6:20-cv-480; 6:20-cv-481; 6:20-cv485; 6:20-cv-486 (W.D. Tex.)

Dear Brian:

We write on behalf of our client WSOU Investments, LLC in response to the 

letters we have received dated June 29, 2021 and July 13, 2021. These letters hastily

request that WSOU narrow its number of asserted claims to thirty-two (32) across all 

cases. 

As you are aware, the proper timing to narrow claims in this litigation has been 

set forth by the Court’s Order Governing Proceedings (“OGP”). According to the 

Scheduling Order, filed November 17, 2020, there are two (2) specific dates for the 

narrowing of claims. The two deadlines mandated by the Court to meet and confer to 

discuss significantly narrowing the number of claims asserted is 1) October 29, 2021 and 

2) February 18, 2022. See Scheduling Order at 3, WSOU Investment, LLC v. Dell Techs. 

Inc., EMC Corp., and VMware, Inc., No. 20-00476 (W.D. Tex. 2020), ECF No. 50. Not 

until after the second deadline the Court requires the parties to file a Joint Report within 

five (5) business days regarding the resolution of the narrowing of the claims. Because 

Dell’s request is months before the first meet and confer, we are not obligated to reduce 

the number of asserted claims. 

Case 6:20-cv-00477-ADA Document 110-6 Filed 08/18/21 Page 2 of 3
Brian Rosenthal

July 16, 2021

Page 2

Moreover, fact discovery has only recently begun, with several disputes still 

outstanding on WSOU’s discovery requests. Without the benefit of full discovery, WSOU 

cannot be expected to arbitrarily limit the number of terms it is asserting at this time. 

WSOU will reduce the number of claims in accordance with the Scheduling Order and 

after complete discovery but will not do so at this time. 

Regards,

/s/ Jim Etheridge

Jim Etheridge

Case 6:20-cv-00477-ADA Document 110-6 Filed 08/18/21 Page 3 of 3
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5564 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5564

      To suspend temporarily the rate of duty on certain footwear.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 8, 2012

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
      To suspend temporarily the rate of duty on certain footwear.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN FOOTWEAR.

    (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        Footwear with       Free            No change      No change      On or before     ''.
                          outer soles and                                                   12/31/2015
                          uppers of rubber
                          or plastics,
                          other than house
                          slippers, and
                          other than such
                          footwear for men
                          or women, the
                          foregoing with
                          open toes or open
                          heels, or of the
                          slip-on type,
                          that is held to
                          the foot without
                          the use of laces
                          or buckles or
                          other fasteners,
                          except footwear
                          of subheading
                          6402.99.33 and
                          except footwear
                          having a foxing
                          or a foxing-like
                          band wholly or
                          almost wholly of
                          rubber or
                          plastics applied
                          or molded at the
                          sole and
                          overlapping the
                          upper (provided
                          for in subheading
                          6402.99.49)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to articles 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
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
3RD QUARTER 1997 FORM 10-Q OF THE SOUTHERN NEW ENGLAND TELEPHONE COMPANY
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  285,300
<ALLOWANCES>                                    14,600
<INVENTORY>                                     13,500
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               416,400
<PP&E>                                       4,424,400
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,032,700
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,901,600
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          452,700
<BONDS>                                        666,900
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       380,400
<OTHER-SE>                                     267,700
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,901,600
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,150,200
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  882,500
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,200
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              33,600
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                232,900
<INCOME-TAX>                                    90,800
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            142,100
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                (3,700)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   138,400
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT
      32.1





**CERTIFICATION
      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 accompanying Annual Report of Hotel Outsource Management
      International, Inc. on Form 10-KSB for the year ending December 31, 2006 as
      filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
      Report), I, Jacob Ronnel, Chief Executive 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, to the best of my knowledge, that:





(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 operations of the Company.








By:
                /s/ Jacob RonnelJacob
                Ronnel, Chief Financial OfficerHotel
                Outsource Management International, Inc.April
                16, 2007
<PAGE>
                                  EXHIBIT 32.1

                        CERTIFICATION OF CEO 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 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Newcastle Investment Corp.
(the "Company") for the annual period ended December 31, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Wesley R.
Edens, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, 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 his 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 operations of the Company.


/s/ Wesley R. Edens
-------------------------------------
Wesley R. Edens
Chief Executive Officer
March 16, 2005

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to the Company and will be retained
by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.
**Exhibit 32.1** **CERTIFICATIONS**     Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002    (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350,    Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), each of    the undersigned officers of Standard Microsystems Corporation    (the Company), does hereby certify, to such officer’s    knowledge, that:     The Quarterly Report on    Form 10-Q    for the quarter ended November 30, 2006 of the Company    fully complies, in all material respects, with the requirements    of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of    1934, and information contained in the    Form 10-Q    fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial    condition and results of operations of the Company.    Dated: December 21, 2006     By: /s/  Steven    J. Bilodeau
EXHIBIT 9 

Case 6:20-cv-00477-ADA Document 110-10 Filed 08/18/21 Page 1 of 2
1

From: Barry Shelton <bshelton@sheltoncoburn.com>

Sent: Friday, July 23, 2021 5:49 PM

To: mark waltfairpllc.com

Subject: RE: WSOU v. Dell: PO and discovery limits discussion

Great, thanks Mark. The other proposal we made was for the trial groupings, which I don’t think WSOU has ever

responded to.  

Barry

From: mark waltfairpllc.com <mark@waltfairpllc.com>  

Sent: Friday, July 23, 2021 4:41 PM

To: Barry Shelton <bshelton@sheltoncoburn.com>

Subject: RE: WSOU v. Dell: PO and discovery limits discussion

Hey Barry,

I sent an email out to the WSOU team inquiring about these two issues. I was involved with the discovery limit proposal

(no clue on the PO). I think WSOU’s proposal was very reasonable and Dell should consider accepting our proposal.

Otherwise, we can always just stick with the ol’ OGP. I think we can reach agreement on the discovery limits stuff.  

I’ll get back to you with a time to M&C once I hear back from everyone.  

Sincerely,

Mark  

From: Barry Shelton <bshelton@sheltoncoburn.com>  

Sent: Friday, July 23, 2021 4:28 PM

To: mark waltfairpllc.com <mark@waltfairpllc.com>

Subject: WSOU v. Dell: PO and discovery limits discussion

Hi Mark,

Can you let me where we are with these issues? I think it is advisable to have another meet and confer to try to make

additional progress then bring the remaining issues to the Court for resolution. Thanks, and have a nice weekend.  

Barry  

Barry K. Shelton | Partner  

Shelton Coburn LLP

311 RR 620 S, Suite 205

Austin, Texas 78734‐4775

T: (512) 263‐2165 | F: (512) 263‐2166 | M: (512) 517‐9998

bshelton@sheltoncoburn.com | www.sheltoncoburn.com

Case 6:20-cv-00477-ADA Document 110-10 Filed 08/18/21 Page 2 of 2
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-40521 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus RICKY LEE LANDRY, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 1:96-CR-73-1

- - - - - - - - - - December 15, 1997 Before DUHÉ, DeMOSS, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Ricky Lee Landry challenges his sentence, arguing that the district court erred in denying him a three-level reduction forhis acceptance of responsibility and erred in making drugquantity calculations. The defendant's failure to withdraw voluntarily from criminal conduct remains an appropriate consideration under the amended guideline's application notes. U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1, comment. (n.1(b)). Continued criminal conduct is a sufficientNo. 97-40521 -2- basis for denying a reduction for acceptance of responsibility.
See United States v. Watkins , 911 F.2d 983, 985 (5th Cir. 1990). Because Landry admitted that he used methadone while on release pending sentence and because the evidence also showed that Landry attempted to fabricate the results of his urinalysis, the district court did not err in denying the three-level reduction. We further find that the district court’s determination that Landry was accountable for 12.69 grams of heroin was not clearly

erroneous. United States v. Bermea , 30 F.3d 1539, 1575 (5th Cir. 1994).
AFFIRMED.