alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
JOINT COUNCIL No. 16 

INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS 

April 1, 2015 

The Honorable Anthony R. Foxx 

Secretary of Transportation 

US Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Ave SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

The Honorable John F. Kerry 

Secretary of State 

US Department of State 

2201 C Street NW 

Washington, DC 20520 

Dear Secretaries Foxx and Kerry265 WEST 14TH STREET- SUITE 1201 

NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10011 

{212) 924-0002 

FAX {212) 691-7074 

I am writing to express my sincerest concern over the recent reports that three state-owned 

Gulf carriers have received over $40 billion in unfair subsidies from the governments of Qatar and the 

United Arab Emirates (UAE)- a practice that is contrary to the Open Skies agreements between the U.S. 

and each respective country. 

The unfair subsidization of the Gulf carriers has enabled them to add new routes that have not 

increased passenger traffic, but instead have shifted traffic from U.S. carriers, taking good American jobs 

overseas. As a matter of fact, for every new, international flight the U.S. carriers lose, there is a net loss 

of over 800 jobs. 

I've been a Teamster for over forty years and currently serve as Secretary-Treasurer of Local 210 

in New York, President of Joint Council16, and President of the Teamsters National Hispanic Caucus. The 

loss of much-needed jobs is concerning for me and for my local community. American Airlines, one of 

the coalition members, employs over 8,000 people in the New York area alone - many of whom are 

union members. It is imperative that the U.S. protect well-paying, much-needed American jobs and 

ensure that there is healthy and fair competition among airlines. 

318 
While we support the Open Skies policy, we are opposed to an uneven playing field, where one 

side has an unfair advantage over the other. For this reason we are respectfully asking the U.S. 

government to open consultations with Qatar and the United Arab Emirates in an effort to bring the 

core objective of the Open Skies agreement back in line: fair, market-based competition. 

On behalf of my union brothers and sisters, and New Yorkers, I ask that you consider taking 

action on this issue. 

Sincerely, /~~ 

16.r.Miranda 

President 

Joint Council No. 16 

Cc: 

Senator Charles Schumer 

Senator Kirsten Gillibrand 

Representative Steve Israel 

Representative Joseph Crowley 

Representative Gregory Meeks 

Representative Grace Meng 

Representative Sean Patrick Maloney 

Representative Jerrold Nadler 

Representative Nita Lowey 

Representative Jose Serrano 

Representative Eliot Engel 

Representative Peter King 

Governor Andrew Cuomo 

Mayor Bill de Blasio
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

WACO DIVISION

§

WSOU INVESTMENTS, LLC, §

§

Plaintiff, §

§

§ CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20-cv-473-ADA

v. §

§

DELL TECHNOLOGIES INC., §

DELL INC., and EMC CORPORATION, §

§

Defendants. §

§ 

§

UNOPPOSED MOTION TO WITHDRAW LETTERS ROGATORY

Defendants Dell Technologies Inc., Dell Inc., and EMC Corporation (“Defendants”) file 

this Unopposed Motion to Withdraw Letters Rogatory and respectfully show the following:

Defendants filed a Motion for Issuance of Letters Rogatory on November 6, 2020 (Dkt.

43). Pursuant to an agreement between Defendants and Nokia of America, Defendants request that 

the Court withdraw the Letters Rogatory issued by the Court to the Central Authority in France for 

discovery from Alcatel-Lucent International (Dkt. 55) and Karine Berthier (Dkt. 55-1). The Court 

retains jurisdiction over the withdrawn Letters Rogatory in the event that disputes arise regarding 

the discovery sought therein. Counsel for Defendants conferred with counsel for Plaintiff who 

stated that Plaintiff does not oppose this request.

Wherefore, Defendants respectfully request that the Court grant this motion and enter an 

order withdrawing the Letters Rogatory.

Case 6:20-cv-00473-ADA Document 86 Filed 05/04/21 Page 1 of 3
UNOPPOSED MOTION TO WITHDRAW LETTERS ROGATORY Page 2

Respectfully submitted,

Dated: May 4, 2021 By: /s/ Barry K. Shelton

 Barry K. Shelton

 Texas State Bar No. 24055029

SHELTON COBURN LLP

311 RR 620, Suite 205

 Austin, TX 78734-4775

 bshelton@sheltoncoburn.com

(512) 263-2165 (Telephone)

 (512) 263-2166 (Facsimile)

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS

DELL TECHNOLOGIES INC., DELL 

INC., and EMC CORPORATION

Case 6:20-cv-00473-ADA Document 86 Filed 05/04/21 Page 2 of 3
UNOPPOSED MOTION TO WITHDRAW LETTERS ROGATORY Page 3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned hereby certifies that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing 

document has been served on all counsel of record via the Court’s ECF system.

 /s/ Barry K. Shelton

Barry K. Shelton

Case 6:20-cv-00473-ADA Document 86 Filed 05/04/21 Page 3 of 3
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5695 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5695

     To extend the suspension of duty on certain cathode-ray tubes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 9, 2012

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To extend the suspension of duty on certain cathode-ray tubes.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN CATHODE-RAY TUBES.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.85.42 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to certain cathode-ray tubes) 
is amended by striking the date in the effective period column and 
inserting ``12/31/2015''.
    (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>
```
Order entered January 17, 2023

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-22-01000-CV

AMY E. EDWARDS, Appellant

V.

DALCOR SKYLINE LTD. D/B/A SKYLINE, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 5

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. CC-22-03182-E

ORDER

The record before the Court reflects that appellant has filed for bankruptcy. 

This automatically suspends further action in this appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 8.2. 

Accordingly, we ABATE this appeal. It may be reinstated on prompt motion by 

any party complying with Rule 8.3 and specifying what further action, if any, is 

required from this Court. See id. 8.3.

/s/ ROBERT D. BURNS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE
+,AA - 2010 - \ \ \~

Contacts. 'tfrih whom oufside ~ FAA hi this proposal been dis.::ussed?

~tzafun Person Contacted I Date I Res;xlrl5":O

'I;~li"lt~llltJ~;"~'~ Aj~{r"n.l."!iOC1;1li.,'n ni(:011; 7jq/IIJ I

-

~"'.:j"!'1:J1\irll"r ,h.oci:,!lflIJ I

ll~, ••I IlIUrtT I I

,7 .1 ;;~)

<\;ncC:ih Ih'''''''.1< l'U,II_ .\H')"'''{;''n !l~"hrrl!!:,lC"IIIc;t1l 7,

il(-.•I) I I,

I

\ r \ l,\ll.n;la

I 7/11hl I
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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of StockerYale, Inc. (the
“Company”) for the period ended June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Mark W. Blodgett,
President and 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, 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/ Mark W.
      BlodgettMark
      W. BlodgettPresident
      and Chief Executive OfficerAugust
      3, 2009
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

NATIONAL VEHICLE AND FUEL EMISSIONS LABORATORY

2000 TRAVERWOOD DRIVE

ANN ARBOR, MI 48105

- 2498

OFFICE OF

AIR AND RADIATION

May 7, 2012

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: Ferrari M eeting with EPA R egarding Proposal for 2017

- 2025 Light

- Duty (LD)

Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Standards

FROM: Robin Moran, Senior Policy Advisor

TO: EPA Docket # EPA

- HQ

- OAR

- 2010

- 0799

This memo documents a meeting held on May 3, 2012 between representatives of Ferrari and

EP A to discuss EPA’s request for comment on a concept of operational independence in the LD

GHG proposed rule. The meeting attendees included the following:

Ferrari

David Wertheim, Roberto Fedeli, Jean Jacques His, Sabina Fascioli, Brad Stott, and Richard

Penna (outside counsel)

EPA

Chet France, William Charmley, Robin Moran, Linc Wehrly

The discussion centered on Ferrari’s interest in a provision that would allow a company to apply

to EPA for status as operationally independent from its parent company an d thereby receive

status as a small volume manufacturer. Ferrari provided the attached 3 pages of information (2

additional pages were provided but claimed as confidential business information). EPA

indicated that no decisions have been made yet regardi ng the final rule provisions on this issue.

Attachment
**Exhibit 99.2**

 

 

**Report of Independent Auditors**

 

To the Board of Directorsof AmeriCredit Corp.

 

 

Re:     Sale and Servicing Agreement related to AmeriCredit AutomobileReceivables Trust 2002-B as of and for the year ended December 31, 2002

 

 

We have examined management’sassertion about AmeriCredit Corp. and its subsidiaries’ (the “Company”)compliance with the minimum servicing standards identified in the MortgageBankers Association of America’s *Uniform Single Attestation Program for MortgageBankers*, to the extent such procedures are applicable, as of and forthe year ended December 31, 2002 included in the accompanying managementassertion (Exhibit I).  Management isresponsible for the Company’s compliance with those minimum servicingstandards.  Our responsibility is toexpress an opinion on management’s assertion about the Company’s compliancebased on our examination.

 

Our examination was madein accordance with attestation standards established by the American Instituteof Certified Public Accountants and, accordingly, included examining, on a testbasis, evidence about the Company’s compliance with the minimum servicingstandards and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary inthe circumstances.  We believe that ourexamination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.  Our examination does not provide a legaldetermination of the Company’s compliance with the minimum servicing standards.

 

In our opinion,management’s assertion that the Company has complied with the aforementioned minimumservicing standards as of and for the year ended December 31, 2002 is fairlystated, in all material respects.

 

 

Pricewaterhouse Coopers LLP

March 30, 2004

 

----

 

Exhibit I

 

Management’s Assertion Concerning Compliancewith USAP Minimum Servicing Standards

 

 

March 30, 2004

 

Re:          Sale and Servicing Agreement related to AmeriCreditAutomobile Receivables Trust 2002-B as of and for the year ended December 31,2002

 

As of and for the year endedDecember 31, 2002, AmeriCredit Corp. and its subsidiaries have complied in allmaterial respects with the minimum servicing standards set forth in theMortgage Bankers Association of America’s *UniformSingle Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers* (“USAP”), to theextent such procedures are applicable.

 

 
| /s/ Clifton  H. Morris   |   |
|--------------------------|--------|
| Clifton H.  Morris       |
| Chief  Executive Officer |
|                     |
| /s/ Daniel  E. Berce     |   |
| Daniel E.  Berce         |
| President                |
|                     |
| /s/ Preston  A. Miller   |   |
| Preston A.  Miller       |
| Chief  Financial Officer |
|                          |        |  |

 

----
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 196 (Tuesday, October 10, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 60252]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-25941]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Thrift Supervision


Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

October 4, 2000.
    The Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS) has submitted the following 
public information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and 
clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. 
Interested persons may obtain copies of the submission(s) by calling 
the OTS Clearance Officer listed. Send comments regarding this 
information collection to the OMB reviewer listed and to the OTS 
Clearance Officer, Office of Thrift Supervision, 1700 G Street, NW, 
Washington, DC 20552.

DATES: Submit written comments on or before November 9, 2000.
    OMB Number: 1550-0063.
    Form Number: OTS Form 1564.
    Type of Review: Regular review.
    Title: Activities of Savings and Loan Holding Companies.
    Description: 12 CFR Part 584.2-1 required prior notification to the 
OTS by savings and loan holding companies proposing to engage in 
prescribed services and activities. The OTS uses this information to 
track activities and decide the advisability of other actions.
    Respondents: Savings and Loan Associations and Savings Banks.
    Estimated Number of Responses: 2.
    Estimated Burden Hours Per Response: 2 hours.
    Frequency of Response: Once per year.
    Estimated Total Reporting Burden: 4 hours.
    Clearance Officer: Ralph E. Maxwell, (202) 906-7740, Office of 
Thrift Supervision, 1700 Street, NW, Washington, DC 20552.
    OMB Reviewer: Alexander Hunt, (202) 395-7860, Office of Management 
and Budget, Room 10202, New Executive Office Building, Washington, D.C. 
20503.

John E. Werner,
Director, Information & Management Services.
[FR Doc. 00-25941 Filed 10-6-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6720-01-P
State of California

AIR RESOURCES BOARD

Addendum to the Final Statement of Reasons for Rule making

ADOPTION OF THE REGULATION TO REDUCE GREENHOUSE GAS

EMISSIONS FROM HEAVY-DUTY VEHICLES

Public Hearing Date: December 11, 2008

Agenda Item No.: 08-11-4 Addendum Prepared: December 8, 2009

I. Background

On October 23, 2009, the Air Resources Board (ARB o r Board) submitted the Final Statement of Reasons (FSOR) and the Final Reg ulation Order for the regulation to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from heavy-duty vehicles (regulation) to the Office of Administrative Law (O AL) for its review and approval. In the course of its review, OAL identif ied several places in the Final Regulation Order where changes of a technical or gr ammatical nature would improve consistency or readability of the text. Th is Addendum is being submitted to OAL to describe and provide reasons for these ch anges by ARB to the Final Regulation Order.

II. Additional Non-Substantial Changes

ARB identified and made additional modifications to improve consistency and grammar of the regulation, as described below. ARB has determined that the changes described are all non-substantial in that n one of them materially alter the requirements, rights, responsibilities, conditi ons or prescriptions contained in the Final Regulation Order filed with OAL.

Section 95302. Definitions.

ARB deleted the date from the definition of "delaye d compliance trailer" at subsection (a)(12). The change improves clarity of the regulation by eliminating a one-day inconsistency between the del ayed compliance date

in the definition and the date set forth in subsect ion 95307(b)(4), which is cross-referenced by the definition.

In the definition of "DOORS" at subsection (a)(15), ARB changed references to two other regulations from upper case to lower case type.2 Section 95307. Optional Trailer Fleet Compliance Sc hedules. Subsection (e), Calculation Methodology.

To eliminate potential confusion caused by the subs ection’s use of N B to indicate both large fleet and small fleet complianc e plan base numbers, ARB assigned different notations for the base numbe rs for large fleets in subsection (e)(1) and small fleets in (e)(2). Larg e fleet base numbers are now designated as N LB and small fleet base numbers are designated as

N SB. In addition, the description in subsection (e)(5) of the value N B to be used in Equation 6 was modified to reflect the revi sed notations in the preceding definitions.

In (e)(2), a reference to “refrigerated trailers” w as changed to “refrigeratedvan trailers” for consistency.

In (e)(3), “Delayed compliance trailer number” was changed to “Number of delayed compliance trailers” to be consistent with other language in the

subsection.

Also in (e)(3), “if applicable” was added to the pr ovision relating to the number of early compliance trailers to acknowledge that not all fleets will have early compliance trailers, and to make this pr ovision consistent with a parallel provision in subsection (e)(1).
#### FRIENDLY FINANCE, Inc., movant, v. Noble BARKER et al., opposed.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Nov. 30, 1951.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 15, 1952.

Farland Robbins, Mayfield, for movant.

F. B. Martin and Sam Boyd Neely, May-field, opposed.

PER CURIAM.

Motion for an appeal from the Graves Circuit Court. Money judgment for $401.

Appeal denied. Judgment affirmed.
[Cite as State ex rel. Williams v. Sieve, 130 Ohio St.3d 207, 2011-Ohio-5258.] 

THE STATE EX REL. WILLIAMS, APPELLANT, v. SIEVE, JUDGE, APPELLEE. 

[Cite as State ex rel. Williams v. Sieve, 130 Ohio St.3d 207, 2011-Ohio-5258.] 

Civil procedure—Disqualification of magistrate—Mandamus to conduct hearing 

denied—Adequate remedy by appeal. 

(No. 2011-0959—Submitted October 5, 2011—Decided October 18, 2011.) 

APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Hamilton County, No. C-110179. 

__________________ 

Per Curiam.

{¶ 1} We affirm the judgment of the court of appeals dismissing the 

petition of appellant, Daniel J. Williams Jr., for a writ of mandamus to compel 

appellee, Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas, Domestic Relations Division 

Judge Jon Sieve, to follow procedural law by hearing and considering oral 

arguments before ruling on Williams’s motion to disqualify a court magistrate in a 

divorce case. Removal of a magistrate is within the judge’s discretion, In re 

Disqualification of Wilson (1996), 77 Ohio St.3d 1250, 674 N.E.2d 360, and 

mandamus will not lie to control judicial discretion, even if that discretion is 

abused. State ex rel. Avery v. Union Cty. Court of Common Pleas, 125 Ohio St.3d 

35, 2010-Ohio-1427, 925 N.E.2d 969, ¶ 1. Williams has an adequate remedy by 

appeal to raise any claims of error in the domestic-relations case. 

Judgment affirmed. 

O’CONNOR, C.J., and PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O’DONNELL,

LANZINGER, CUPP, and MCGEE BROWN, JJ., concur. 

__________________ 

 Daniel J. Williams Jr., pro se. 
SUPREME COURT OF OHIO

2 

 Joseph T. Deters, Hamilton County Prosecuting Attorney, and Charles W. 

Anness, Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. 

______________________
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-00486-ADA Document 169 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-00486-ADA Document 169 Filed 03/21/22 Page 2 of 2