alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Page | 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. 

HUAWEI TECHNOLOGIES CO.,

LTD. and HUAWEI 

TECHNOLOGIES USA INC.,

Defendants.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-00533-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-00534-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-00535-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-00536-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-00537-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-00538-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-00539-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-00540-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-00541-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-00542-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-00543-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-00544-ADA

WSOU INVESTMENTS, LLC’S NOTICE OF COMPLIANCE REGARDING 

EXCHANGE OF CLAIM TERMS FOR CONSTRUCTION

TO THE HONORABLE COURT:

Pursuant to the Court’s Version 3.2 of the Court’s Order Governing proceedings entered 

November 9, 2020, and in accordance with the Court’s Scheduling Order, Plaintiff hereby notifies 

the Court Plaintiff has served its proposed claim terms for construction on Defendants Huawei 

Technologies Co., LTD and Huawei Technologies USA Inc. via electronic mail on December 21, 

2020.

Case 6:20-cv-00542-ADA Document 36 Filed 12/21/20 Page 1 of 2
Page | 2

DATED: December 21, 2020 Respectfully submitted,

By: /s/ Mark D. Siegmund_____ 

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

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

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

electronically via U.S. District Court [LIVE]- Document Filing System, to all counsel of record, 

on this the 21st day of December 2020.

/s/ Mark D. Siegmund

Mark D. Siegmund

Case 6:20-cv-00542-ADA Document 36 Filed 12/21/20 Page 2 of 2
#### SIMPSON v. STATE.

No. 24374.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 25, 1949.

*665No appearance for appellant.

Ernest S. Goens, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

The conviction is for “driving a motor vehicle on a public street in Brazos County, Texas, while intoxicated.” A jury assessed a fine of $100.00, from which this appeal is taken.

The record is before us without statement of facts or bills of exception. We find indicated by the record only one complaint, raised in several different ways, contending that the complaint and information are insufficient in that allegation is made that the accused drove an automobile while intoxicated on a public street in Brazos County, Texas, but did not name an incorporated city or town where the street was located.

We find nothing wrong with the allegation. A public street in Brazos County is a “public road or highway,” as meant by the statute, Vernon’s Ann.P.C. art. 802, regardless of the name of the incorporated town or city where it is found. It is not necessary to make specific allegation naming or describing the highway. Bedwell v. State, 142 Tex.Cr.R. 599, 155 S.W.2d 930. The statute reads:

“Any person who drives or operates an automobile or any other motor vehicle upon any public road or highway in this State, or upon any street or alley within the limits of an incorporated city, town or village, while such person is intoxicated or under the influence of intoxicating liquor, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor,” etc.

A “road” may not always be accepted as a “street”, but a “street” is a road, nevertheless. It is equivalent to saying that an animal is not necessarily a man, but a man is an animal, nevertheless.

We have not been favored with a brief by appellant and are not advised as to the line of reasoning which he would recommend to reach his desired conclusion. We find no decisions of our Court on the subject and doubt if the question has ever been raised before this Court heretofore. If so, it failed to sufficiently impress the Court or the digest makers with its importance and, as a consequence, we are unable to find any such decision.

Being of the opinion that the complaint •and information are drawn in compliance with the statute, and finding no reversible error in the record, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
<PAGE>

                                                                    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 of Tektronix, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended August 26, 2006 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Richard
H. Wills, 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 the best of 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.

Dated: October 4, 2006

/s/ RICHARD H. WILLS
----------------------------------------
Richard H. Wills
President and Chief Executive Officer
#### WALKER v. STATE.

No. 22178.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

June 17, 1942.

Conner Scott, of Brownwood, for -appellant.

Spurgeon E. Bell, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

KRUEGER, Judge.

The conviction is for the offense of possessing whisky in a dry area for the purpose of sale. The punishment assessed is confinement in the county jail for a period of six months.

Appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to justify and sustain his conviction. In order that this opinion may reflect the basis of our conclusion, we deem it proper to briefly state the evidence adduced by the State. It appears from the record that on the 21st day of March, 1942, a deputy constable saw the appellant drive into the driveway of Joe Cole’s Service Station, located in the city of Brownwood in Brown County. The constable noticed that when appellant opened the door to his automobile he had a pint bottle in his hand which he was attempting to put in the bosom of his shirt but when he saw the officer approaching he took the top off the bottle and poured the contents thereof back of the seat of his car with the exception of one-third of a pint which the officer recovered. Appellant did not testify. However, it was admitted by his counsel that Brown County was a dry area, as charged in the complaint and information. It was further admitted, in connection with the allegation of repetition of offenses contained in the information and for no other purpose, that the defendant in this cause is the same defendant who was convicted in cause No. 6940.

We are of the opinion that appellant’s contention is well founded. It will be noted that appellant possessed but one pint of whisky, which was not a violation of the law, unless he possessed it for the purpose of sale. Therefore, the prima facie statutory rule of evidence would not apply, and the State had the burden of proving that he possessed it for the purpose of sale. In the absence of such proof the conviction cannot be sustained. Of course, there is a stipulation in the record to the effect that appellant was the same person who was convicted in cause No. 6940, as alleged in the count setting out the allegation of repetition of offenses, but this stipulation is so limited that it merely admitted that he was the same person who was convicted in said cause and for no *208other purpose. The State having tied its hands should not he permitted, under its solemn agreement, to stretch them out further than it had agreed to. See Williams v. State, 139 Tex.Cr.R. 35, 138 S.W.2d 807; Williams v. State, 136 Tex.Cr.R. 511, 126 S.W.2d 976; Crutchfield v. State, 137 Tex.Cr.R. 572, 132 S.W.2d 857; Brooks v. State, 138 Tex.Cr.R. 526, 137 S.W.2d 768.

From what we have said it follows that the judgment of the trial court should he reversed and the cause remanded, and it is so ordered.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals, has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.
## Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

William Robert Parker, Appellant

No. 06

- 15

- 00058

- CR v.

The State of Texas, Appellee Appeal from the 123rd District Court of Panola County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 13,122 ). Opinion delivered b y Justice Burgess, Chief Justice Morriss and Justice Moseley

, participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find that the appeal should be dismissed

for want of jurisdiction . Therefore, we dismiss the appeal.

We note that the appellant, William Robert Parker, has adequately indicated his i nability

to pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED JUNE 16, 2015

BY ORDER OF THE COURT JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST: Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
exv10w3w3



 






EXHIBIT 10.3.3




AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO

1993 STOCK OPTION AND INCENTIVE PLAN




          The Trinity Industries, Inc. 1993 Stock Option and Incentive Plan, as amended
from time to time (the “Plan”), is hereby amended by this Amendment No. 3,
effective as of July 16, 1997.




          Any term which is not defined below shall have the meaning set forth for such
term in the Plan.





          24. Maximum Compensation of an Employee.
Notwithstanding the foregoing provisions of
this Plan, on and after July 16, 1997 the
maximum number of Shares for which grants of
stock options and Stock Appreciation Rights may be made to an employee in any
fiscal year of the Company shall not exceed one-half of
one percent (0.5%) of the total number of Shares of the Company outstanding on
March 31, 1997, and the exercise price of any stock
option or Stock Appreciation Right granted on
and after July 16, 1997 shall in no event be less than the
Fair Market Value of the Shares at the time of the grant.



          IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Amendment to be executed by a
duly authorized officer of the Company as of the day and year first above
written.




	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	TRINITY INDUSTRIES, INC.
	 
	 	 	 	 
	 

	 	By:
	 	/s/ W. Ray Wallace
U.S. Department of 

Transportation 

Office of the Secretory 

of Transportation 

Memorandum 

Subject: Notice of Comm ... Luv ...... L...,L 

DOT -OST -2010-001 

Date: 

U.S.-Haneda '--'VHH ... _._ •• L._ ... 

From: The Secretary Reply to 

Attn. of: 

To: 

In accordance with Department rules (14 CFR Part 300), I am reporting the following 

communication. 

On October 5, 2012, during a call with Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah, the Senator expressed his 

support for the application of Delta Air Lines to operate between Seattle and Tokyo's Haneda 

International Airport. 

I informed the Senator that, while I appreciated his interest in this case, I could not comment on 

its merits because the proceeding was under active consideration by the Department. 

Please place this memorandum in the appropriate file and in the Docket. 

CC: Senator Orrin Hatch
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 203 (Thursday, October 19, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 62715]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-26832]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RP01-36-000]


Maritimes & Northeast Pipeline, L.L.C.; Notice of Proposed 
Changes in FERC Gas Tariff

October 13, 2000.
    Take notice that on October 6, 2000, Maritimes & Northeast 
Pipeline, L.L.C. (Maritimes) tendered for filing as part of its FERC 
Gas Tariff, First Revised Volume No. 1, First Revised Sheet No. 11, to 
become effective on November 1, 2000.
    Maritimes states that, pursuant to section 20 of the General Terms 
and Conditions of its FERC Gas Tariff, it is filing its Inaugural Fuel 
Retainage Quantity filing to revise the Fuel Retainage Percentages 
(FRPs) for the four calendar periods beginning November 1, 2000. 
Maritimes states that its projected FRPs reflect decreases of 0.50% in 
the winter period and 0.10% in the spring and fall shoulder periods, 
with no change in the summer period.
    Maritimes also states that it is submitting the calculation of the 
fuel retainage quantity (FRQ) deferral allocation, pursuant to section 
20 which provides that Maritimes will calculate surcharges or refunds 
designed to amortize the net monetary value of the balance in the FRQ 
Deferred Account at the end of the previous accumulation period. 
Maritimes states that for the period December 1, 1999 through July 31, 
2000, the FRQ Deferred Account resulted in a net credit balance of 
approximately $750,000 that will be refunded to Maritimes' customers, 
based on the allocation of the account balance over the actual 
throughput during the accumulation period, exclusive of backhauls.
    Maritimes states that copies of this filing were mailed to all 
affected customers of Maritimes and interested state commissions.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Sections 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission's Rules 
and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed in 
accordance with section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. 
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the 
appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants 
parties to the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must 
file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public 
Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance).

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-26832 Filed 10-18-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service 

          - 26 CFR Part 1 
          - [REG-117162-99] 
          - RIN 1545-AY23 

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury. 

# ACTION:

Correction to notice of proposed rulemaking. 

# SUMMARY:

                        This document contains a correction to proposed regulations that were published in the                         **Federal Register**                         on Thursday, March 23, 2000 (65 FR 15587) relating to tax treatment of cafeteria plans.                     

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Christine L. Keller, (202) 622-6080 (not a toll-free number). 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

## Background   

The notice of proposed rulemaking that is the subject of this correction is under section 125 of the Internal Revenue Code. 

## Need for Correction 

As published, the proposed regulations contain an error that may prove to be misleading and is in need of clarification. 

## Correction of Publication 

Accordingly, the publication of the proposed regulations (REG-117162-99), that were the subject of FR Doc. 00-5818, is corrected as follows: 

On page 15587, column 2, the regulation heading in the middle of the column, line 5, the “RIN 1545-AX59” is corrected to read “RIN 1545-AY23”. 

Cynthia E. Grigsby,

Chief, Regulations Unit, Office of Special Counsel (Modernization and Strategic Planning). 

[FR Doc. 00-27311 Filed 10-24-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                            9

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                              6,571
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                              5,256
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                      455
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                        0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                             0
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                             60,982
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                               60,061
<LOANS>                                           241,520
<ALLOWANCE>                                         1,403
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    325,879
<DEPOSITS>                                        268,882
<SHORT-TERM>                                        9,500
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                                 4,154
<LONG-TERM>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                   0
<PREFERRED>                                             0
<COMMON>                                               61
<OTHER-SE>                                         43,282
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                    325,879
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                    17,153
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                   3,902
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                      425
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                   21,480
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                                 10,867
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 11,757
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                               9,723
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                         162
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                      0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                     8,967
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     1,124
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                              0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                         0
<CHANGES>                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                          687
<EPS-BASIC>                                           .12
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         .12
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                       7.12
<LOANS-NON>                                           383
<LOANS-PAST>                                            0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                        0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                    1,273
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                         208
<RECOVERIES>                                          177
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                   1,403
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                1,403
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                     0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                                 0



</TABLE>
Exhibit 32





Certifications Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350





The undersigned, who are the chief executive officer and the chief financial officer of Synalloy Corporation, each hereby certifies that, to the best of his knowledge, the accompanying Form 10-Q of the issuer fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that information contained
in the report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the issuer.











November 12, 2009
s/Ronald H. BraamRonald H. Braam
Chief Executive Officers/Gregory M. BowieGregory M. Bowie
Chief Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer
Exhibit 32.2

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Downside Up, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10K-SB for the period ending April 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof ("Report"), I, Angelo Luca,
Vice-President 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 the best of
my knowledge:

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

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


 /s/ Angelo Luca
----------------------------------------
Angelo Luca
Vice-President
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 Annual Report of AXT, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ending
December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned 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 my knowledge:



Date: March 22, 2010

By:

/s/ MORRIS S. YOUNGMorris S. Young Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)


---