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

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

HEADWATER RESEARCH LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

SAMSUNG ELECTRONIC CO., LTD and 

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, 

INC.,

Defendants.

Case No. 2:23-CV-00103-JRG-RSP

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL

Notice is hereby given that Christopher O. Green, of the law firm Fish & Richardson P.C.,

enters his appearance in this matter for Defendants Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung 

Electronics America, Inc. and consents to electronic services of all papers in this action.

Dated: January 30, 2024 Respectfully submitted,

FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.

By: /s/ Christopher O. Green

Christopher O. Green

GA Bar No. 037617

FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.

1180 Peachtree St NE, 21st Floor

Atlanta, GA 30309

Phone: (404) 892-5005

Fax: (404)892-5002

Email: cgreen@fr.com

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD AND

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.

Case 2:23-cv-00103-JRG-RSP Document 71 Filed 01/30/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 2093
2

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

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

document has been served on January 30, 2024 to all counsel of record who are deemed to have 

consented to electronic service via the Court’s CM/ECF system per Local Rule CV-5(a)(3). 

/s/ Christopher O. Green

Christopher O. Green

Case 2:23-cv-00103-JRG-RSP Document 71 Filed 01/30/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 2094
```
  
 
VIX FUTURES - CBOE FUTURES EXCHANGE                                  Code-1170E1
OPTION AND FUTURES COMBINED POSITIONS AS OF 02/14/12          |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  Long  | Short  |Spreads |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
($1000 X INDEX)                                      OPEN INTEREST:      209,554
COMMITMENTS
  43,681   61,226   27,027  112,398  100,711  183,106  188,964   26,448   20,590

CHANGES FROM 02/07/12 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:     18,420)
   6,646    5,715   -4,626   12,602   14,870   14,622   15,959    3,798    2,461

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADER
    20.8     29.2     12.9     53.6     48.1     87.4     90.2     12.6      9.8

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       95)
      28       26       27       31       29       75       72
```

----

Updated February 17, 2012
Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATIONS

I, James R. Maronick, certify that:

1.          I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Solitario Resources Corporation for the year ended December 31, 2006;

2.          Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 

3.          Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 

4.          The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have: 

               a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; 

               b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

               c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

5.          The registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): 

               (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

               (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.
**Exhibit 21****List of Subsidiaries of Olympic Steel, Inc.**     **Name of Subsidiary** **State of Organization** **% Ownership**Olympic Steel Lafayette, Inc. Ohio 100%     Olympic Steel Minneapolis, Inc. Minnesota 100%     Olympic Steel Receivables, Inc. Delaware 100%     Olympic Steel Receivables LLC Delaware 100% (a)     Olympic Steel Trading, Inc. Ohio 100%     Oly Steel Welding, Inc. Michigan 100%     Olympic Steel Iowa, Inc. Iowa 100% (b)     OLP LLC Michigan 50%   (c)     G.S.P., LLC Michigan 100% (d)     Oly Steel NC, Inc. Delaware 100%     Tinsley Group – PS&W, Inc. North Carolina 100%  (e) (a) Owned 100% by Olympic Steel, Inc. and Olympic Steel Receivables, Inc. (b) Owned 100% by Olympic Steel Minneapolis, Inc. (c) Owned 50% by Oly Steel Welding, Inc. (d) Owned 100% by Oly Steel Welding, Inc. (e) Owned 100% by Oly Steel NC, Inc.
```
 
 
MSCI EAFE MINI INDEX - NYSE LIFFE                                    Code-244041
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 09/18/12                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(MSCI EAFE INDEX X $50)                              OPEN INTEREST:       70,098
COMMITMENTS
   7,407    2,314      872   55,843   63,039   64,122   66,225    5,976    3,873

CHANGES FROM 09/11/12 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:      1,734)
    -498      -12   -1,482    3,243    1,140    1,263     -354      471    2,088

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    10.6      3.3      1.2     79.7     89.9     91.5     94.5      8.5      5.5

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       70)
      10        4        2       37       32       48       37
 
 
MSCI EMERGING MKTS MINI INDEX - NYSE LIFFE                           Code-244042
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 09/18/12                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(MSCI EAFE INDEX X $50)                              OPEN INTEREST:      141,381
COMMITMENTS
  23,237   17,443    1,347   94,135  108,248  118,719  127,038   22,662   14,343

CHANGES FROM 09/11/12 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:      7,661)
   1,290    2,135   -3,339    6,180    5,719    4,131    4,515    3,530    3,146

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    16.4     12.3      1.0     66.6     76.6     84.0     89.9     16.0     10.1

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      109)
      32       10        5       50       39       84       52
```

----

Updated September 21, 2012
<PAGE>

                                                                  Exhibit 10.6


                     CONFIRMATION OF GUARANTY AND AGREEMENT

         Reference is made to that certain Guaranty (the "Guaranty") by the
undersigned of all obligations of The J. Jill Group, Inc. (the "Borrower")
executed on June 24, 2001 to Citizens Bank of Massachusetts ("Citizens"),
individually and as Agent for the benefit of, and on behalf of, all Lenders, as
such term is defined in that certain Fifth Amended and Restated Loan Agreement
among Borrower, Citizens, HSBC Bank USA, and Banknorth, N.A. f/k/a Peoples
Heritage Bank, N.A., successor by merger to Bank of New Hampshire, N.A. dated as
of June 29, 2001, as amended as of August 28, 2001, July 25, 2002, and as the
same may hereafter be amended (collectively, the "Loan Agreement"), a copy of
which Guaranty is annexed hereto. The undersigned hereby confirms to Citizens
individually and as Agent that (i) the Guaranty is valid, binding and
enforceable against the undersigned and the undersigned's successors and assigns
in accordance with its terms and (ii) without limiting the definition of
"Obligations" thereunder, the undersigned remains and is liable to Citizens
individually and as Agent for all "Obligations" as defined in the Guaranty.

         Reference is also made to the Loan Agreement. The undersigned hereby
confirms that any representation, warranty or covenant in said Loan Agreement
made to Citizens individually and as Agent as aforesaid by the Borrower
regarding the undersigned including, without limitation, any representation
about the undersigned or any covenant that Borrower will cause the undersigned
to perform or to refrain from performing any act shall be deemed to be a direct
representation, warranty or covenant to Citizens individually and as Agent from
the undersigned, and said Citizens individually and as Agent may rely upon the
same as if such representation, warranty or covenant had been made directly to
Citizens individually and as Agent from the undersigned.

         Executed as an instrument under seal this 25th day of July, 2002.

                               QT SERVICES GROUP, INC.

                               By: /s/ Gordon R. Cooke
                                   ---------------------------------------
                                   Name: Gordon R. Cooke
                                   Title: Chief Executive Officer and President
Alj HILTON, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-6358.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 19, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

RODNEY SANCHEZ LOPEZ,

Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee. §

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 14

- 000 70

- CR

Appeal from

143rd District Court

of Reeves County, Texas

(TC # 13

- 08

- 0779 9

- CRR)

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Rodney Sanchez Lopez attempts to appeal his conviction of possession with intent to

deliver more than four grams but less than 200 grams of cocaine . Finding that Appellant has not

timely filed his notice of appeal or a motion for extension of time, we dis miss the appeal for

want of jurisdiction.

A timely notice of appeal is necessary to invoke this Court’s jurisdiction. Olivo v. State

,

918 S.W.2d 519, 522 (Tex.Crim.App. 1996). The record before us reflects that sentence was

imposed in open court on Janua ry 7, 2014. Appellant did not file a motion for new trial.

Therefore, his notice of appeal was due to be filed on February 6, 2014, thirty days after the date

sentence was imposed in open court. See T EX .R.A PP .P. 26.2(a)(1). Appellant filed his notice o f

appeal one day late, on February 7, 2014. Pursuant to Rule 26.3, a court of appeals may grant an- 2

-

extension of time to file notice of appeal if the notice is filed within fifteen days after the last day

allowed and, within the same period, a motion is fi led in the court of appeals reasonably

explaining the need for the extension of time. T EX .R.A PP

. P. 26.3; Olivo , 918 S.W.2d at 522.

Appellant did not file a motion requesting an extension of time pursuant to Rule 26.3. Because

Appellant did not timely f ile his notice of appeal, he failed to perfect this appeal.

Appellant has filed a motion to dismiss his appeal pursuant to T EX .R.A PP .P. 42.2, but the

motion is not in compliance with the requirements of that rule. Given that we lack jurisdiction of

the appeal, we deny Appellant’s motion to dismiss as moot and dismiss the a ppeal for want of

jurisdiction.

August 6, 2014

ANN CRAWFORD McCLURE, Chief Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rivera, and Rodriguez, JJ.

(Do Not Publish)
null

2011-03-24

276.08212

eng - Argued: 2011-03-24. Docket number: 1-10-0518
Elroy William ROBINSON, petitioner, v. CALIFORNIA.

No. 18-6402.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 7, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of California denied.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JEFFREY WHALEY,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.

STATE OF ALASKA, Department of Public Safety; SAFARILAND, LLC,

Defendants

- Appellees. No. 23

- 35431

D.C. No. 4:21

- cv

- 00006

- JMK

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Alaska

Joshua M. Kindred, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted May 13 , 2024 * *
Anchorage, Alaska

Before: BYBEE, FRIEDLAND, and MILLER, Circuit Judges.

Plaintiff Jeffrey Whaley appeals the district court’s grant of summary

judgment in favor of Defendants after removal from state court

. We asked the

parties to file supplemental briefs addressing whether there is any basis for subject

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

MAY 22 2024

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2

matter jurisdiction here

. United States v. S. Pac. Transp. Co. , 543 F.2d 676, 682

(9th Cir. 1976) (“[W]e are bound to consider jurisdictional defects sua sponte.”).

The parties now agree that there is no diversity jurisdiction in this case

because the State of Alaska is a party. See Dep’t of Fair Emp. & Hous. v. Lucent

Techs., Inc. , 642 F.3d 728, 737 (9th Cir. 2011) (“[N]either a state nor a state

agency [can] be a party to a diversity action.” ( alteration in original) ( quot ation

marks and citation omitted)); Fifty Assocs. v . Prudential I ns. Co. , 446 F.2d 1187,

1188

- 89, 1191

- 92 (9th Cir. 1970) (holding that there was no diversity jurisdiction

where the plaintiff sued a state agency alongside private entities); Luehrs v. Utah

Home Fire Ins. Co. , 450 F.2d 452, 455 n. 4 (9th Cir. 1971) (noting that

, in Fifty

Associates , “the pleadings were apparently incapable of amendment because the

S tate of Arizona had been made a defendant, thereby destroying diversity”); Lee v.

Am. Nat’l Ins. Co. , 260 F.3d 997, 1005 (9th Cir. 2001) (explaining that failure to

meet the diversity requirements for each defendant “render[s] the entire case

beyond the federal court’s power to decide”). The parties also agree that there are

no other grounds for federal jurisdiction here

.

We hold that “removal to federal court was improper and the district court

lacked jurisdiction to do anything other than remand [this] case [] to state court.”

Dennis v. Hart , 724 F.3d 1249 , 1255 (9th Cir. 2013)

. We thus vacate the district

court’s orde r s and judgment and remand with instructions to remand to state court.3

JUDGMENT AND ORDER S VACATED AND REMANDED.
EXHIBIT 32-A

FARO Technologies, Inc.

Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002

Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, the undersigned President, and Chief Executive Officer and Director of FARO Technologies, Inc., (the Company) hereby certify, based on my knowledge, that the Annual Report on Form 10-K, for the year ended
December 31, 2006 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) 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 Company.



|                              
|------------------------------
|                              
|/s/    JAY W. FREELAND        
|Jay W. Freeland March 15, 2007
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _
Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A1 9 A0 56 1 . ROY BOONE BRI GHT v . THE STATE.

Ro y Bo on e Bri gh t was ch arg ed wi t h b u rg l ary an d t h eft

. Bri g h t rep res en t ed
h i m s el f at tri al aft er wh i ch a ju ry fo u n d h i m g u i l t y

. In Oct o b er 2 0 17
, t h e t r i a l c o u rt

g ran t ed Bri g h t a n ew t ri al

. Th ere a f t er, Bri g ht fi l ed a m o t i o n fo r s p eed y t ri al
, wh i ch

t h e t ri al co u rt d en i ed as u n t i m el y

. Bri g h t fi l ed an ap p l i cat i o n fo r d i s cret i on ary ap p eal
f r o m th i s ru l i n g , wh i ch th is Co u rt g ran t ed o n Ap ri l 1 2
, 2 01 8

. See Cas e N u m b e r A1 8 D0 39 4

. Th e o rd er d i rect ed Bri g h t t o fi l e a n o t i ce o f ap peal wi t h i n 1 0 d ay s o f t h e d at e o f t h e o rd er. See OCGA § 5 -6 -3 5 (j). Bri g h t fi l ed h is n o t i ce o f ap p eal o n Ap ri l
2 4
, 2 0 1 8
, t wel v e d ay s aft er t h e en t ry o f t h e ord er. Th e St at e h as fi l ed a m o t i o n to
d i s m i s s t he ap p eal as u n t i m el y

. Th e t i m el y fi l i n g o f a n o t i ce o f ap p eal i s an ab s o lu t e req u irem en t t o co n fer ju ri s d i ct i o n on t h i s Co urt

. W h it e v. W h i t e , 1 8 8 Ga. A pp

. 5 5 6
, 5 5 6 (3 7 3 SE2 d 8 2 4 ) (1 9 8 8). Becau s e Bri g h t fai l ed t o fi l e a n o t ice o f ap p eal w i t hi n 1 0 d ay s o f t h e o rd er
g ran t i n g t h e d is cret i o n ary ap pl icat i o n, t h e n o t i ce o f ap p eal i s u n t i m el y

. Acco rd i n g l y , t h e St at e’ s m ot i o n t o d is m i ss i s h ereb y GRANTED an d t h is ap p eal i s D ISM ISSED.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia C le r k ’ s O f f i c e , A t la n t a ,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r t if y t h a t th e a b o v e i s a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d t h e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t
h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. December 12, 2018

12/12/2018
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 Bedford Property Investors, Inc. (the Company) for the quarter ended September 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Peter B. Bedford, 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 (Section 906), 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.





Date:November 11, 2003

/s/ Peter B. Bedford



Peter B. Bedford

Chief Executive Officer







A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, 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.
Larry FLENOID, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-6584.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 10, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
FERGUSON FLORISSANT SCHOOL DISTRICT, petitioner, v. MISSOURI STATE CONFERENCE OF the NATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF COLORED PEOPLE, et al.

No. 18-592.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 7, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
Augustus Hebrew EVANS, Jr., petitioner, v. DELAWARE.

No. 18-5820.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* denied, and petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Delaware dismissed. See Rule 39.8.