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

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

HEADWATER RESEARCH LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

T-MOBILE USA, INC. AND SPRINT CORP.,

Defendants.

Case No. 2:23-cv-00377-JRG-RSP

(Member Case Under -379 Action)

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

HEADWATER RESEARCH LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

T-MOBILE USA, INC. AND SPRINT CORP.,

Defendants.

Case No. 2:23-cv-00379-JRG-RSP

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

DECLARATION OF JASON WIETHOLTER IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF 

HEADWATER’S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO STAY PENDING 

INTER PARTES REVIEW AND RELATED MANUFACTURER CASES

Case 2:23-cv-00379-JRG-RSP Document 99 Filed 10/25/24 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: 6907
1

1. I, Jason Wietholter, declare as follows:

2. I am counsel for Headwater Research LLC (“Headwater”) in the above-captioned 

action. I provide this declaration in support of Headwater’s Opposition to Defendants’ Motion To 

Stay Pending Inter Partes Review and Related Manufacturer Cases. I have personal knowledge of 

the facts set forth herein, and if called upon to testify, could and would testify competently thereto.

3. On October 4, 2024, the parties met and conferred regarding Defendants’ Motion.

4. Kristopher Davis and myself attended on behalf of Headwater.

5. Andrew Robb attended on behalf of Defendants.

6. During the conference, Mr. Robb stated that Defendants would not agree to be 

bound by any determinations in any of the other suits involving Headwater and Samsung.

7. Attached as Exhibit A is a true and correct copy of Decision Granting Institution of 

Inter Partes Review in IPR2024-00809, Paper 11, dated October 23, 2024.

8. Attached as Exhibit B is a true and correct copy of Petition for Inter Partes Review 

of U.S. Patent No. 9,198,042 in IPR2024-00809, Paper 4, dated April 19, 2024.

9. Attached as Exhibit C is a true and correct copy of Petition for Inter Partes Review

in IPR2024-00945, Paper 1, dated June 7, 2024.

10. Attached as Exhibit D is a true and correct copy of Petition for Inter Partes Review

in IPR2024-00944, Paper 1, dated June 7, 2024.

11. Attached as Exhibit E is a true and correct copy of Petition for Inter Partes Review

in IPR2024-00943, Paper 1, dated June 7, 2024.

12. Attached as Exhibit F is a true and correct copy of Petition for Inter Partes Review

in IPR2024-00942, Paper 1, dated June 7, 2024.

13. Attached as Exhibit G is a true and correct copy of Petition for Inter Partes Review

Case 2:23-cv-00379-JRG-RSP Document 99 Filed 10/25/24 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 6908
2

of U.S. Patent No. 8,924,543 in IPR2024-01042, Paper 5, dated June 20, 2024.

14. Attached as Exhibit H is a true and correct copy of Petition for Inter Partes Review

of U.S. Patent No. 8,924,543 in IPR2024-01041, Paper 5, dated June 20, 2024.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. 

Executed on October 24, 2024 at Los Angeles, California.

By: /s/ Jason Wietholter

Jason Wietholter

Case 2:23-cv-00379-JRG-RSP Document 99 Filed 10/25/24 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: 6909
`DTCC Repo-US Treasury <30 YR - NYSE LIFFE - NYPC                     Code-045L2T
OPTION AND FUTURES COMBINED POSITIONS AS OF 11/13/12          |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  Long  | Short  |Spreads |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF $5,000,000)                            OPEN INTEREST:       40,079
COMMITMENTS
   1,591   22,933    2,265   35,843   14,516   39,699   39,714      380      365

CHANGES FROM 11/06/12 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:      2,529)
     467    2,272      328    2,488    1,013    3,283    3,613     -754   -1,084

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADER
     4.0     57.2      5.7     89.4     36.2     99.1     99.1      0.9      0.9

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       45)
       6       12        7       22       21       31       37`

---

Updated November 16, 2012
JoAnn HATCH, petitioner, v. Megan J. BRENNAN, Postmaster General, et al.

No. 18-416.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 3, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Inconnection with the Annual Report of Uromed Corporation (the “Company”) on Form10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2002 (the “Report”), as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Ivo Heiden, CEO and Chairman ofthe Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

1. TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

2. Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

/s/ Ivo Heiden

Ivo Heiden CFO and ChairmanDated: June 22, 2005

A signed original of this writtenstatement required by Section 906 has been provided to Uromed Corporation and will beretained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or itsstaff upon request.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT



The Board of Directors and Shareholders
TALX Corporation:

We consent to incorporation by reference in registration statements No.
333-14619, No. 333-18389, No. 333-18393, No. 333-47569, No. 333-83369, and No.
333-83367 on Forms S-8 of TALX Corporation of our report dated April 20, 2001,
except for note 16, which is as of June 21, 2001, and for note 17, which is as
of June 22, 2001 relating to the consolidated balance sheets of TALX Corporation
and subsidiaries as of March 31, 2000 and 2001, and the related consolidated
statements of operations, shareholders' equity, and cash flows for each of the
years in the three-year period ended March 31, 2001, which report appears in the
March 31, 2001 annual report on Form 10-K of TALX Corporation.


                                                            /s/ KPMG LLP

St. Louis, Missouri
June 28, 2001
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-6725

JERRY ADAM HELMS, JR.,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

PATRICK CONROY, Warden,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (CA00-978-PJM)

Submitted: July 27, 2000 Decided: August 7, 2000

Before MURNAGHAN, WILKINS, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jerry Adam Helms, Jr., Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
* Although the district court's orders are dated April 11,

2000, and May 2, 2000, the district court's records show that they

were entered on the docket sheet on April 13, 2000, and May 8,

2000, respectively. Pursuant to Rules 58 and 79(a) of the Federal

Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date that the order was physically entered on the docket sheet that we take as the effective

date of the district court's decision. See Wilson v. Murray, 806

F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986).

2

PER CURIAM:

Jerry Adam Helms, Jr., appeals the district court’s orders

dismissing his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2000) complaint and

denying his motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See

Helms v. Conroy, No. CA-00-878-PJM (D. Md. April 12 & May 4,

2000).* 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
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE AUDITED
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000917770
<NAME>                        FIBERCORE, INC.
<MULTIPLIER>                  1,000
<CURRENCY>                    US

<S>                                         <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                               YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                              JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                DEC-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                             1
<CASH>                                              487
<SECURITIES>                                          0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     2,147
<ALLOWANCES>                                       (220)
<INVENTORY>                                       3,047
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  5,563
<PP&E>                                            7,109
<DEPRECIATION>                                   (3,047)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   24,062
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             4,522
<BONDS>                                           9,563
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                 0
<PREFERRED>                                           0
<COMMON>                                             42
<OTHER-SE>                                        6,672
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     24,062
<SALES>                                          12,126
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 12,236
<CGS>                                             9,820
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    13,779
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    336
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                1,062
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (2,941)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        937
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (2,004)
<DISCONTINUED>                                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                       0
<CHANGES>                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (2,004)
<EPS-BASIC>                                       (0.05)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (0.05)



</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                          26,823
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   21,697
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,260
<INVENTORY>                                     34,502
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                98,288
<PP&E>                                          58,074
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (8,360)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 377,722
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           88,204
<BONDS>                                        120,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                      52,918
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   377,722
<SALES>                                         51,305
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                91,947
<CGS>                                           34,523
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   58,831
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                21,401
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    70
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,090
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  7,659
<INCOME-TAX>                                     3,391
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,268
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    241
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,027
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    2.014
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    2.014
        

</TABLE>
```
  
 
VIX FUTURES - CBOE FUTURES EXCHANGE                                  Code-1170E1
OPTION AND FUTURES COMBINED POSITIONS AS OF 02/28/12          |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  Long  | Short  |Spreads |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
($1000 X INDEX)                                      OPEN INTEREST:      236,528
COMMITMENTS
  74,235   83,718   21,214  119,828  109,903  215,277  214,835   21,251   21,693

CHANGES FROM 02/21/12 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:     31,950)
   9,399   14,204    2,308   19,772   11,762   31,479   28,274      471    3,676

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADER
    31.4     35.4      9.0     50.7     46.5     91.0     90.8      9.0      9.2

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      106)
      28       34       27       27       33       73       82
```

----

Updated March 2, 2012
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

BRIAN BUCHANAN, §

§

Plaintiff, §

§

versus § CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:23-CV-223

§

OFFICER SELLARS, §

§

Defendant. §

ORDER ADOPTING 

THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Plaintiff Brian Buchanan, proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights lawsuit. The court

previously referred this matter to the Honorable Zack Hawthorn, United States Magistrate Judge,

at Beaumont, Texas, for consideration pursuant to applicable laws and orders of this court. The

magistrate judge has submitted a Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge

recommending the case be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. 

To date, the parties have not filed objections.

The court has received the Report and Recommendation, along with the record, pleadings,

and all available evidence. After careful review, the court finds that the findings of fact and

conclusions of law of the magistrate judge are correct.

Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge (#4) is

ADOPTED. A final judgment shall be entered dismissing this lawsuit.

Case 1:23-cv-00223-MAC-ZJH Document 6 Filed 08/15/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 17
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALNCE
SHEET AND STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                      30,914,241
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               71,154,726
<ALLOWANCES>                                16,545,844 
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           104,714,395
<PP&E>                                     119,760,954
<DEPRECIATION>                              23,329,902 
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             389,917,806
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       70,900,752
<BONDS>                                    187,916,782
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       226,040
<OTHER-SE>                                 121,015,750
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               389,917,806
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           166,673,579
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                            12,558,484
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          13,475,589
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (16,663,535)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (16,663,535)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (19,717,537)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.89)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.89)
        

</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-50344

Summary Calendar

BLAYNE D. WILLIAMS, SR.

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

CITY OF AUSTIN; AUSTIN POLICE DEPARTMENT; MARGO FRASIER, in 

her official and individual capacities; FRED FLETCHER, in his official 

capacity; ART ACEVEDO, in his official and individual capacities; JOHN 

DOE; JANE DOE; AUSTIN POLICE DEPARTMENT - ART ACEVEDO, in 

his official and individual capacities; CHATTANOOGA POLICE 

DEPARTMENT; FRED FLETCHER, in his individual capacity

Defendants-Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 1:16-CV-1338

Before SMITH, WIENER, and WILLETT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Plaintiff-Appellant, Blayne D. Williams, Sr., proceeding pro se, is before 

us for the second time in this case, now under Rule 60(b). This time he seeks 

to overturn the district court’s March 2018 Order denying his Motion for 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

November 20, 2018

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 18-50344 Document: 00514730471 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/20/2018
No. 18-50344

2

Relief from Judgment. At the core of both of Williams’s appeals has been the 

rejection of his contention that the statute of limitations should not have 

been employed to dismiss his lawsuit because of the “Continuous Violations 

Doctrine” which prevents application of the time bar.

We have reviewed the record on appeal, including the briefs of the 

parties and the district court’s March 26, 2018 Order denying Williams’s 

Motion for Relief from Judgment, and we conclude that the district court did 

not abuse its discretion in denying that motion or in any other way. The 

abovesaid Order is, therefore, AFFIRMED.

 Case: 18-50344 Document: 00514730471 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/20/2018
```
  
 
WHEAT - MINNEAPOLIS GRAIN EXCHANGE                                   Code-001626
OPTION AND FUTURES COMBINED POSITIONS AS OF 01/03/12          |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  Long  | Short  |Spreads |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 5,000 BUSHELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:       40,986
COMMITMENTS
  15,865    1,767    3,234   12,108   26,205   31,207   31,206    9,780    9,781

CHANGES FROM 12/27/11 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:        159)
   1,332     -443     -340   -1,246    1,352     -253      570      412     -411

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADER
    38.7      4.3      7.9     29.5     63.9     76.1     76.1     23.9     23.9

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       49)
      17        4       13       21       19       44       34
```

----

Updated January 6, 2012
<PAGE>

                                                                     EXHIBIT 21

                        OVERSEAS FILMGROUP, INC. SUBSIDIARIES

Alien Towers, Inc., a California corporation
Code 99 Productions, Inc., a California corporation
Enough Rope, Inc., a California corporation
Intrastate Film Distributors, Inc., a Delaware corporation
Jacaranda Music, Inc., a Delaware corporation
Overseas Filmgroup (UK) Limited, a corporation organized under the laws of the
United Kingdom
Positive, Inc., a California corporation
Road to Ruin, Inc., a California corporation
Walrus Pictures, Inc., a California corporation

                     OVERSEAS FILMGROUP (UK) LIMITED SUBSIDIARIES

Elphich Limited, a corporation organized under the laws of the United Kingdom
OFG Films Limited, a corporation organized under the laws of the Island of
Jersey
Exhibit C

Case 2:23-cv-00285-JRG-RSP Document 52-3 Filed 04/30/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 874
Subject: Subject: RE: Cobblestone v. Samsung

Date: Date: Friday, April 26, 2024 at 5:53:26PM Central Daylight Time

From: From: Olga Slobodyanyuk

To: To: ptong@raklaw.com, Brice Lynch, rak_cobblestone@raklaw.com

CC: CC: QE-Cobblestone-Samsung, Melissa Smith, Fair, Andrea

Counsel,

We will be making a prompt produc7on of source code once it has been approved by the MOTIE

commiAee. We can confirm that the MOTIE commiAee review session already took place, and all that

remains is for MOTIE to issue its decision/clearance and we can get the code produced. We will let you

know once we get the commiAee’s response, which we hope to receive soon.

Please be advised that we will shortly be making another produc7on of chipset specifica7ons and system

requirements for the baseband products and will produce financial informa7on for the accused

products, both of which we expect to make next week. We will supplement our interrogatories once

those produc7ons are served.

Thank you,

Olga

From: ptong@raklaw.com <ptong@raklaw.com>

Sent: Tuesday, April 23, 2024 10:29 AM

To: Olga Slobodyanyuk <olgaslobodyanyuk@quinnemanuel.com>; Brice Lynch

<bricelynch@quinnemanuel.com>; rak_cobblestone@raklaw.com

Cc: QE-Cobblestone-Samsung <qe-cobblestone-samsung@quinnemanuel.com>; Melissa Smith

<Melissa@gillamsmithlaw.com>; Fair, Andrea <andrea@wsfirm.com>

Subject: Subject: Re: Cobblestone v. Samsung

[EXTERNAL EMAIL from [EXTERNAL EMAIL from ptong@raklaw.com ptong@raklaw.com]]

Olga,

Your latest email comes as a surprise. Your March 26 email estimated that “we will be making at

least some of the source code available within a month.” Now, you are sugges7ng that it may be another

2 weeks thereacer. If you cannot confirm MOTIE approval by March 26 and prompt produc7on, we

cannot con7nue to keep wai7ng indefinitely and will move to compel produc7on regardless of when

Samsung may or may not receive approval. 

Please let us know when we can expect Samsung’s supplemental interrogatory responses, especially

those supplemen7ng by iden7fying specific Bates numbers.

Peter Tong

Russ, August & Kabat

4925 Greenville Avenue, Suite 200 | Dallas, Texas 75206

Main +1 310 826 7474 | ptong@raklaw.com | www.raklaw.com

From: Olga Slobodyanyuk <olgaslobodyanyuk@quinnemanuel.com>

Date: Friday, April 19, 2024 at 8:22 PM

Case 2:23-cv-00285-JRG-RSP Document 52-3 Filed 04/30/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 875
Alandis D. PATTERSON, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-8268.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.