alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32(1)



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 1350



In connection with the Quarterly Report of 7-Eleven, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2005, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, James W. Keyes, President and Chief Executive 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, to my 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/ James W. KeyesJames W. KeyesPresident and Chief Executive Officer7-Eleven, Inc.




Tab 6
FILED UNDER SEAL

1

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.

ZTE CORPORATION, ZTE (USA) 

INC., AND ZTE (TX), INC. 

Defendants.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20-cv-487-ADA

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20-cv-488-ADA

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20-cv-489-ADA

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20-cv-490-ADA

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20-cv-491-ADA

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20-cv-492-ADA

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20-cv-493-ADA

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20-cv-494-ADA

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20-cv-495-ADA

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20-cv-496-ADA

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20-cv-497-ADA

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

FILED UNDER SEAL

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE SUR-REPLY

WSOU Investments (“WSOU”) respectfully requests leave to file the attached sur-reply 

(Exhibit A1) opposing ZTE USA’s and ZTE TX’s renewed motion to dismiss or transfer. WSOU 

requests leave to file a sur-reply to: 

 but that was not produced until after WSOU filed its response; 

and (2) briefly address arguments made in ZTE’s reply brief. 

1 While this document and Exhibit A are being filed in each of the above captioned cases, to 

preserve resources, the remaining exhibits are being filed only in the -487 case.
2

-

–

.

2

2 ZTE did not produce any of the Gogo contracts. WSOU obtained them from public sources and 

from Gogo.
3

WSOU did not receive Amendment No. 4 until it was produced by Gogo after WSOU filed 

its response. It should have been produced by ZTE at least before Mr. Wood’s May 26, 2020 

deposition. Therefore, WSOU respectfully seeks leave to file the attached sur-reply, which 

addresses the significance of Amendment No. 4 and briefly addresses other arguments raised in 

ZTE’s reply.
4

Dated: July 1, 2021 Respectfully submitted,

By: /s/ Ryan Loveless

James L. Etheridge 

Texas Bar No. 24059147 

Ryan S. Loveless 

Texas Bar No. 24036997 

Etheridge Law Group, PLLC 

2600 E. Southlake Blvd., Suite 120 / 324 

Southlake, TX 76092 

Tel.: (817) 470-7249 

Fax: (817) 887-5950 

Jim@EtheridgeLaw.com 

Ryan@EtheridgeLaw.com 

Mark D. Siegmund

State Bar No. 24117055

mark@waltfairpllc.com

Law Firm of Walt, Fair PLLC.

1508 North Valley Mills Drive 

Waco, Texas 76710

Telephone: (254) 772-6400

Facsimile: (254) 772-6432

Counsel for Plaintiff WSOU Investments, LLC
5

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

A true and correct copy of the foregoing instrument was served or delivered electronically 

via the U.S. District Court [LIVE]-Document Filing System to all counsel of record July 1, 2021.

/s/ Ryan Loveless

Ryan S. Loveless 

CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE

Counsel for WSOU conferred with counsel for ZTE by email on June 30, 2021. The parties 

did not agree and ZTE is opposed to the relief requested.

/s/ Ryan Loveless

Ryan S. Loveless
|                                                                                                                                       
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                                                       
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                                                         
|View History: Annual                                                                                                                   
|View History: Annual                                                                                                                   
|View History:                                                                                                                          
|                                                                                                                                       
|Gulf of Mexico Federal Offshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Production from Less than 200 Meters Deep (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                                                       
|                                                                                                                                       
|Gulf of Mexico Federal Offshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation, Production from Less than 200 Meters Deep (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                                                                                                                            |        |        | 4,410  | 4,422  | 4,503  | 4,315  | 4,496  | 4,653  | 4,243  | 3,876 
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 3,705  | 3,660  | 3,180  | 2,852  | 2,716  | 1,898  | 1,692  | 1,712  |        |       
|- = 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
## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S O F T E X A S NO. AP -77,002

EX P ARTE DARRELL WAYNE BIVENS, JR., App licant

ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. 296-81350-2012 IN THE 296 DISTRICT COURT FROM COLLIN COUNTY

T H



### Per curiam . O P I N I O N Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas C o d e o f C ri minal Procedur e, the cler k of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for writ of habea s corpus. Ex parte Y oung , 418 S.W .2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant pleade d g uilty and was convicted of failing to reg ister as a sex offe nder. He was sentenc ed to three y ear s’ imprisonment. He did not appea l his conviction. Applicant committed indece ncy with a child when he was six teen y ear s old. He was cer tified

as an adult and, afte r a period of defe rre d adjudication, was sentenc ed to two y ear s’ imprisonment. He ful ly discharg ed that sentenc e on approximately November 13, 1998. Be cause he was undersevente en y ear s’ of ag e at the time of that offe nse, his crime was not considere d a “sexually violent

offe nse”. T E X

A S C O D E C R

I M . P R O . Art. 62.001(6). His duty to r eg ister as a sex off ender there fore expired on the tenth anniver sary of the discharg e of that sentenc e. T E X A S C O D E C R

I M . P R O . Art. 62.12(b). The offe nse date alleg ed in this indictment was over three y ear s afte r Applicant’s duty to reg ister as a

sex offender

had expired. The State and the trial court ag ree that Appl i ca n t h as established by clea r and convincing evidenc e that a jur

y would acquit him of the c harg e. Relief is g rante d. The judgme nt in Cause No. 296-81350-2012 in the 296 J udicial District t h C ourt of Colli n County is set aside, and Applicant is rema nded to the Colli n Coun t y S h er i ff t o
answe r the c harg e ag ainst him. Copies of this opinion shall b e s e n t to th e T e xa s D e p a r tment of Criminal J ustice–Corre ctional I nstitut ions Division and Pardons and Paroles Division.

Deliver ed: Marc h 27, 2013 Do Not Publish
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-1389

SECURITIES & EXCHANGE COMMISSION,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

CHARLES ZANDFORD,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Greenbelt. Andre M. Davis, District Judge. (CA-95-

2826-AMD)

Submitted: October 22, 2004 Decided: December 3, 2004

Before WILKINSON, MICHAEL, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Charles Zandford, Appellant Pro Se. Susan Sholar McDonald, Jacob

H. Stillman, SECURITIES & EXCHANGE COMMISSION, Washington, D.C.,

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Charles Zandford appeals the district court’s order

granting the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (“SEC”) motion to

reinstate a partial grant of summary judgment following a remand

from the Supreme Court in SEC v. Zandford, 535 U.S. 813, 825

(2002). 

Following remand from the Supreme Court, the SEC filed a

motion to reinstate the district court’s order granting partial

summary judgment to it. Zandford filed an opposition to that

motion, but failed to assert any substantive argument establishing

a material fact in dispute. Additionally, Zandford refused to make

such arguments at a telephonic status conference held by the

district court. When offered the opportunity to present argument,

in fact, he abruptly terminated the call. Zandford asserts that

there is a genuine issue of fact for the first time on appeal to

this court. However, because Zandford refused to make these

arguments in the district court, despite encouragement from the

court to do so, Zandford failed to meet his burden in opposition to

summary judgment, Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 324

(1986), and ultimately waived his right to appellate review, Muth

v. United States, 1 F.3d 246, 250 (4th Cir. 1993) (stating that

issues raised for the first time on appeal generally will not be

considered absent plain error or a fundamental miscarriage of

justice).
- 3 -

Accordingly, although we grant Zandford’s motion to

supplement the record on appeal, we affirm the district court’s

order. 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.

AFFIRMED
|                                                                                                                    
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                                    
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                                      
|View History: Annual                                                                                                
|View History: Annual                                                                                                
|View History:                                                                                                       
|                                                                                                                    
|California (with State Offshore) Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves Adjustments (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                                                    
|                                                                                                                    
|California (with State Offshore) Natural Gas Liquids Lease Condensate, Proved Reserves Adjustments (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                                                    

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 0     
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 1      | 0      | -1     | -1     | 16     | -15    | -2     | 0      | 0      | 0     
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 0      | 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
## In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02

- 18

- 00487

- CR

K ODY A USTIN L OTT

, Appellant

V

.

T HE S TATE OF T EXAS §

§

§

§

§

§

§

§ O n Appeal from the 30th District Court

Wichita County ( 58029

- A)

and

On Appe al f

rom Criminal District Court No. 1

Tarrant County (C009529)

November 7, 2019

Opinion by Justice Gabriel

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there

was no reversibl e error in the trial court’s judgment s . It is ordered that the judgment s

of the tr ia l court are af

firmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By /s/ Lee Gabriel

Justice Lee Gabriel
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., 

AND EMC CORPORATION, 

Defendants.

Case No. 6:20-cv-00473-ADA

Case No. 6:20-cv-00475-ADA

Case No. 6:20-cv-00476-ADA

Case No. 6:20-cv-00477-ADA

Case No. 6:20-cv-00482-ADA

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

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

Case No. 6:20-cv-00481-ADA

Case No. 6:20-cv-00485-ADA

Case No. 6:20-cv-00486-ADA

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

ORDER DENYING NON-PARTY MOTION FOR 

LIMITED-PURPOSE CONSOLIDATION AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

Pending before the Court is Non-Party Motion for Limited-Purpose Consolidation and 

Protective Order (“Motion”). This Court, having considered the Motion and Defendants’ 

Opposition, HEREBY ORDERS that the Motion be DENIED.

SIGNED this ________ day of ____________________, 2022

HONORABLE ALAN D ALBRIGHT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 6:20-cv-00473-ADA Document 149-1 Filed 01/28/22 Page 1 of 1
|                                                                                                     
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                     
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                       
|View History: Annual                                                                                 
|View History: Annual                                                                                 
|View History:                                                                                        
|                                                                                                     
|North Dakota Nonassociated Natural Gas, Reserves in Nonproducing Reservoirs, Wet (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                     
|                                                                                                     
|North Dakota 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                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        | 118    | 109    | 68     | 67    
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 43     | 43     | 42     | 16     | 14     | 24     | 17     | 12     | 4      | 23    
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 20     | 18     | 9      | 2      | 3      | 0      | 27     | 0      | 0      | 0     
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 2      | 2      |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = 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
DIVISION 242 ANALYSIS

Amended SIP

‐ approved Provision 2015 Submittal & New OAR 340

‐ [or SIP

‐ approved rule if indicated]

Division 242 Heading Division 242 Heading

242

‐ 0500 242

‐ 0500

242

‐ 0520(1) [repealed] 244

‐ 0234(4)(a)(C) 244

‐ 0242(1)(a), (1)(b), (4), [Table 2] 244

‐ 0244(2)

242

‐ 0250 [replaces previous paragraph 1 with the previous paragraph 3, see 242

‐ 0520(3) below]

242

‐ 0520(2) [repealed] 242

‐ 0250 replaces the previous paragraph 2 with the previous paragraph 4,
see 242

‐ 0520(4) below]

There is no replacement for SIP

‐ approved 242

‐ 0520(2), but it is not necessary because of other requirements.

242

‐ 0520(3) 242

‐ 0520(1)

242

‐ 0520(4) 242

‐ 0520(2)

244

‐ 0234(4)(a)(C) 244

‐ 0242(1)(a), (1)(b), (4), [Table 2] 244

‐ 0244(2), 244

‐ 0242 (3), Table 3(i)

242

‐ 0520(5) 242

‐ 0250(3)

242

‐ 0520(6) 242

‐ 0250(4)

There is no replacement for SIP

‐ approved 242

‐ 0520(6) requirements for stage I, but this does not directly affect the stringency of the rule regarding the attainment and maintenance of the NAAQS.

242

‐ 0520(7) [repealed] SIP

‐ approved: 216

‐ 0020: Intro language, Table 1 Part B(35), Table 2 Part 1 (c), Table 2 Part 2(c) 216

‐ 0060(1)(b)(D) & (2)(W)

There is no replacement rule language that the permit be displayed or kept on file at the facility, but it is included in permit condition 10.1 of the GDF ACDP (stage II).DIVISION 242 ANALYSIS

Amended SIP

‐ approved Provision 2015 Submittal & New OAR 340

‐ [or SIP

‐ approved rule if indicated]

242

‐ 0520(8) [repealed] There is no replacement rule language, but it is included in permit condition 7.7 of the GDF ACDP (stage II). 242

‐ 0520(9) [repealed] SIP

‐ approved: 216

‐ 0040(2)(b)(5) 242

‐ 0520 Note at end 242

‐ 0520(5)
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

December 7, 2022

No. 04-22-00754-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF J.M.R., a Child

From the 225th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2021PA01940

Honorable Raul Perales, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

This is an accelerated appeal of an order terminating Appellant’s parental rights which 

must be disposed of by this court within 180 days of the date the notice of appeal is filed. TEX.

R. JUD. ADMIN. 6.2.

Appellant’s brief was due on December 6, 2022. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(a). On the due 

date, Appellant moved for a thirty-day extension of time to file the brief.

Appellant’s motion is granted; the brief is due on January 5, 2022. 

Given the time constraints governing the disposition of this appeal, further requests for 

extensions of time will be disfavored.

It is so ORDERED on December 7, 2022.

PER CURIAM

ATTESTED TO:__________________________

 MICHAEL A. CRUZ, 

 CLERK OF COURT

FILE COPY
EXHIBIT 32.2



                        CERTIFICATION OF CFO PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Sports Arenas,  Inc. and
susidiairies  (the  "Company") for the three months ended  September 30, 2004 as
filed with the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof  (the
"Report"),  Steven R.  Whitman,  Chief  Financial  Officer and  Secretary 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,  to the best of his
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.




     /s/ STEVEN R. WHITMAN
     -----------------------
         Steven R. Whitman
         Chief Financial Officer

         January 12, 2005
         ----------------

This  certification  accompanies  this  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.