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

COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT 

OF TEXAS MARSHALL DIVISION 

HEADWATER PARTNERS II LLC, 

Plaintiff and Counterclaim-Defendant, 

vs. 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§

§

Case No. 2:24-cv-00015-JRG-RSP 

(Lead Case) 

Jury Trial Demanded 

T-MOBILE USA, INC. AND SPRINT LLC, 

Defendants and Counterclaimant-Plaintiffs. 

HEADWATER PARTNERS II LLC, 

Plaintiff and Counterclaim-Defendant, 

vs. 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§

§ 

Case No. 2:24-cv-00016-JRG-RSP 

(Member Case) 

Jury Trial Demanded 

AT&T SERVICES, INC., AT&T MOBILITY 

LLC AND AT&T CORP., 

Defendants and Counterclaimant-Plaintiffs. 

HEADWATER PARTNERS II LLC, 

Plaintiff and Counterclaim-Defendant, 

vs. 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§

§ 

Case No. 2:24-cv-00007-JRG-RSP 

Jury Trial Demanded 

CELLCO PARTNERSHIP, D/B/A VERIZON 

WIRELESS, AND VERIZON CORPORATE 

SERVICES GROUP INC., 

Defendants and Counterclaimant-Plaintiffs. 

ORDER GRANTING NOKIA OF AMERICA CORPORATION’S 

UNOPPOSED MOTION TO INTERVENE 

Before the Court is Intervenor Defendant Nokia of America Corporation’s (“Nokia”) 

Motion to Intervene, filed July 17, 2024. The Court has reviewed the Motion and is fully 

Case 2:24-cv-00015-JRG-RSP Document 59-2 Filed 07/17/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 557
advised in the premises. Nokia moved to intervene pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(a)(2) 

or, in the alternative, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 24(b). Having considered the motion 

and the relevant authorities, the Court finds that the Motion should be and hereby is 

GRANTED. Accordingly, Nokia is permitted to intervene in these actions. 

SIGNED this day of , 2024. 

Case 2:24-cv-00015-JRG-RSP Document 59-2 Filed 07/17/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 558
Dumisai H. HOCKADAY, Petitioner, v. Helene CHRISTNER, et al.

No. 19-7401.

Supreme Court of the United States.

March 30, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied.
Robert L. CLARK, petitioner, v. CARROLL COUNTY SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT, et al.

No. 18-8609.

Supreme Court of the United States

Aug. 5, 2019.

Petition for rehearing denied.
```
 
 
VIX FUTURES - CBOE FUTURES EXCHANGE                                  Code-1170E1
OPTION AND FUTURES COMBINED POSITIONS AS OF 11/12/13          |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  Long  | Short  |Spreads |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
($1000 X INDEX)                                      OPEN INTEREST:      407,724
COMMITMENTS
 116,674  161,199   97,530  170,422  121,846  384,626  380,575   23,098   27,149

CHANGES FROM 11/05/13 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:     18,203)
  -3,437     -820    9,240   11,984    7,718   17,787   16,138      416    2,065

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADER
    28.6     39.5     23.9     41.8     29.9     94.3     93.3      5.7      6.7

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      180)
      55       71       77       34       35      138      146
```

----

Updated November 15, 2013
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                       1,803,147
<SECURITIES>                                 8,342,109
<RECEIVABLES>                               19,566,515
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            11,777,155
<PP&E>                                     886,946,610
<DEPRECIATION>                           (142,777,220)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             785,658,316
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       62,410,128
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                 56,250,000
<COMMON>                                     2,261,008
<OTHER-SE>                                 216,565,395
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               785,658,316
<SALES>                                     59,990,715
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            63,555,040
<CGS>                                       25,218,738
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             3,634,966
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          13,544,559
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              9,609,244
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          9,609,244
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                124,895
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 9,484,349
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .39
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .39
        

</TABLE>
Kendrick TERRELL, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-5420

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
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 EarthShell Corporation (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), each of the
undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, 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 his 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 operation of the Company.

      Dated August 14, 2006


      By: /s/ Vincent J. Truant
          -----------------------
          Vincent J. Truant
          Chief Executive Officer


      By: /s/ D. Scott Houston
          -----------------------
          D. Scott Houston
          Chief Financial Officer
Jonathan Paul SIKES, Petitioner v. Lorie DAVIS, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division

No. 19-5007

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Norman Eugene REED, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-7535.

Supreme Court of the United States.

March 9, 2020.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

MOBILE HEALTH INNOVATIVE 

SOLUTIONS, LLC,

Plaintiff

v.

WITHINGS S.A.,

Defendant.

Case No. 2:23-cv-00610-JRG

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

PATENT CASE

JOINT STIPULATION CONFIRMING WAIVER OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS

Plaintiff Mobile Health Innovative Solutions, LLC (“MHIS”) and Defendant Withings 

S.A. (“Defendant”) respectfully file this Stipulation Confirming Waiver of Service of Summons

under FRCP 4(d), and state as follows:

• Defendant is a company organized and existing under the laws of France.

• On January 29, 2024, the Summons issued in this case was served on Defendant’s U.S. 

subsidiary, Withings, Inc.

• On February 20, 2024, this Court granted Defendant’s unopposed first application for a 

30 day extension of time to answer the complaint, which set the deadline to March 18, 2024.

• On March 14, 2024, counsel for Defendant and counsel for MHIS met and conferred, 

during which counsel for Defendant asserted that the service on Defendant’s U.S. affiliate was not 

sufficient as to Defendant. However, counsel for Defendant agreed to waive service under FRCP 

4(d).

Case 2:23-cv-00610-JRG Document 6 Filed 03/18/24 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: 107
Thus, the Parties jointly stipulate that waiver of service of summons as to Defendant took 

place on March 14, 2024, and that Defendant’s time to answer under FRCP 4(d)(3) is 90 days from 

the date of the Parties’ meet and confer, which is up to and including June 12, 2024.

Dated: March 18, 2024 Respectfully Submitted,

/s/ Randall Garteiser 

Randall Garteiser

 Texas Bar No. 24038912

 rgarteiser@ghiplaw.com

M. Scott Fuller

 Texas Bar No. 24036607

 sfuller@ghiplaw.com

GARTEISER HONEA, PLLC

119 W. Ferguson Street

Tyler, Texas 75702

Telephone: (903) 705-7420

Facsimile: (903) 405-3999

René A. Vazquez

Virginia Bar No. 41988

rvazquez@sinergialaw.com

SINERGIA TECHNOLOGY

LAW GROUP, PLLC

18295 St. Georges Ct.

Leesburg, Virginia 20176

Telephone: (703) 89-2244

COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF

Case 2:23-cv-00610-JRG Document 6 Filed 03/18/24 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 108
/s/ Bryan P. Collins

Bryan P. Collins

Virginia Bar No. 46762

bryan.collins@pillsburylaw.com

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP

1650 Tysons Boulevard, 14th Floor

McLean, VA 22102

Telephone: 703.770.7900

bryan.collins@pillsburylaw.com

Virginia Bar No. 46762

COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY on this, I caused to be electronically-filed the foregoing document

with the Clerk of Court using the Court’s CM/ECF system. As such, this document was served 

on all counsel who are deemed to have consented to electronic service.

/s/ Randall Garteiser

Randall Garteiser

CERTIFICATE OF GOOD FAITH CONFERENCE

Pursuant to Eastern District of Texas Local Rule CV-7(i), counsel has complied with the 

meet and confer requirement in Local Rule CV-7(h). The Parties met on March 14, 2024, and 

counsel for Withings, S.A. is in agreement with this joint stipulation.

/s/ Randall Garteiser

Randall Garteiser

Case 2:23-cv-00610-JRG Document 6 Filed 03/18/24 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: 109
# C_2017072EN.01000301.xml

| 8.3.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 72/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.3.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 72/3

---

Notice of the impending expiry of certain anti-dumping measures

(2017/C 72/03)

1.   As provided for in Article 11(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Union (1), the Commission gives notice that, unless a review is initiated in accordance with the following procedure, the anti-dumping measures mentioned below will expire on the date mentioned in the table below.

1

2.   Procedure

Procedure

Union producers may lodge a written request for a review. This request must contain sufficient evidence that the expiry of the measures would be likely to result in a continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury. Should the Commission decide to review the measures concerned, importers, exporters, representatives of the exporting country and Union producers will then be provided with the opportunity to amplify, rebut or comment on the matters set out in the review request.

3.   Time limit

Time limit

Union producers may submit a written request for a review on the above basis, to reach the European Commission, Directorate-General for Trade (Unit H-1), CHAR 4/39, 1049 Brussels, Belgium (2) at any time from the date of the publication of the present notice but no later than three months before the date mentioned in the table below.

2

4.   This notice is published in accordance with Article 11(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036.

| Product | Country(ies) of origin or exportation | Measures | Reference | Date of expiry (3) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Chamois leather | The People’s Republic of China | Anti-dumping duty | Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1153/2012 of 3 December 2012 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of chamois leather originating in the People’s Republic of China following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 (OJ L 334, 6.12.2012, p. 31) | 7.12.2017 |

Product

Country(ies) of origin or exportation

Measures

Reference

Date of expiry (3)

3

Chamois leather

The People’s Republic of China

Anti-dumping duty

Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1153/2012 of 3 December 2012 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of chamois leather originating in the People’s Republic of China following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Regulation (EC) No 1225/2009 (OJ L 334, 6.12.2012, p. 31)

7.12.2017

---

(1)  OJ L 176, 30.6.2016, p. 21.

1

(2)  TRADE-Defence-Complaints@ec.europa.eu

2

(3)  The measure expires at midnight of the day mentioned in this column.

3

---
Louis R. KOERNER, Jr., Individually and as Assignee of Jean McCurdy Meade, Petitioner, v. CMR CONSTRUCTION & ROOFING, L.L.C.

No. 18-1529

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Lonnie Charles WILLIAMS, III, petitioner, v. TEXAS.

No. 18-667.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 7, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Texas, Second District denied.
Felix A. OKAFOR, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-5075.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 7, 2019.

Petition for rehearing denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2218 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2218

         To suspend temporarily the duty on the chemical TMPDE.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 15, 1999

  Ms. Kaptur introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
         To suspend temporarily the duty on the chemical TMPDE.

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

SECTION 1. TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OF DUTY.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``      9902.32.58      Trimethylolpropane  Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/
                         diallylether                                                       31/2003          ''.
                         (TMPDE) (provided
                         for in subheading
                         2909.49.60)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
apply with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the date that is 15 days after the date of the 
enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 5

Case 2:23-cv-00630-JRG Document 10-5 Filed 05/08/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 137
Case 2:23-cv-00630-JRG Document 10-5 Filed 05/08/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 138
Laurie A. WHITE, Judge, Section A of the Orleans Parish Criminal District Court, et al., Petitioners, v. Alana CAIN, et al.;

Harry E. Cantrell, Magistrate Judge of Orleans Parish Criminal District Court, Petitioner, v. Adrian Caliste, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, et al.

No. 19-822

Supreme Court of the United States.

Feb. 24, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
ex10_9.htm






EXHIBIT 10.9







CLOSING MEMORANDUM












Mission West Properties, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership (“MWP”), and certain members of the Berg Group (collectively the "Seller"), desire to document the purchase and sale of that certain real property (the “Property”) commonly known as 5901, 5921 and 5961 Optical Court, the Hellyer-Embedded land, and the Hellyer-Piercy land located in San Jose, California.  The purchase and sale of the Property is being consummated pursuant to an agreement between Lightpointe Communications, Inc. (“Berg”) and Mission West Properties, L.P.







The parties hereto agree as follows:







Property:  The Property is located at 5901, 5921 and 5961 Optical Court, San Jose, California, and is improved with an approximate 67,500 square foot per building. The Property is also located in San Jose, California as 10.165 acres of raw land at the Hellyer-Embedded site and 9.33 acres of raw land at the Hellyer-Piercy site. The “Property” shall be deemed to include all of Sellers’ right, title, and interest therein.







Consideration:  The Acquisition Value as agreed to by MWP and Berg for the Property is $28,190,427.  The consideration to be paid by MWP is as follows:








	
Repayment of HALP distributions:

	 	$	7,917,729.72	 
	
Interest on HALP distributions:

	 	 	1,299,604.50	 
	
245 Caspian obligation:

	 	 	7,493,728.15	 
	
Unsecured Note @ LIBOR+1.75%:

	 	 	11,479,365.00	 
	
Total

	 	$	28,190,427.37	 










Closing Date: The effective date of the transfer of the Property is February 1, 2012.







Conditions:  The parties hereby waive all conditions to closing.







IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Closing Memorandum effective as of February 1, 2012.







                                                                                     

 



	 MWP	 	 Seller
	 Mission West Properties, L.P., 	 	 Lightpointe Communications, Inc.
	 By: Mission West Properties, Inc.,	 	 
	 Its General Partner	 	 
	 	 	 
	/s/ Raymond V. Marino	 	/s/ Carl E. Berg
	 Raymond V. Marino 	 	 Carl E. Berg
	 	 	 
	Its:	President & COO 	 	Its: 	President
Case 2:23-cv-00501-JRG Document 6 Filed 11/02/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 30
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-6935
HENDERSON MCLEE, Petitioner - Appellant, versus RONALD J. ANGELONE, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. J. Calvitt Clarke, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-96-1152-2) Submitted: March 12, 1998 Decided: March 23, 1998 Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William P. Robinson, Jr., Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellant. Wirt Peebles Marks, IV, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge andfind no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. McLee v. Angelone , No. CA-96-1152-2 (E.D. Va. June 11, 1997). 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.

DISMISSED
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

SYMBOLOGY INNOVATIONS, LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

VALVE CORPORATION

Defendants.

 CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:23-cv-419

NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

Plaintiff, Symbology Innovations, LLC hereby submits this Notice of Voluntary Dismissal 

with Prejudice of Defendant Valve Corporation pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 

41(a)(1)(A)(i). Defendant has not served either an answer or a motion for summary judgment. 

Each Party will bear its own costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees.

Dated: July 26, 2024 Respectfully Submitted,

/s/ Randall Garteiser

Randall Garteiser 

 Texas Bar No. 24038912

 rgarteiser@ghiplaw.com

GARTEISER HONEA, PLLC

119 W. Ferguson Street

Tyler, Texas 75702

Telephone: (903) 705-7420

ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF

Case 2:23-cv-00419-JRG Document 82 Filed 07/26/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 1678
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that all counsel of record who have consented to

electronic service are being served with a copy of this document via the Court’s CM/ECF 

system on this Friday, July 26, 2024.

/s/ Randall Garteiser

Randall Garteiser 

Case 2:23-cv-00419-JRG Document 82 Filed 07/26/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 1679
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

__________ District of __________ 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff(s)

v. Civil Action No.

Defendant(s)

SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION

To: (Defendant’s name and address)

A lawsuit has been filed against you.

Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if you

are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ.

P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) — you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney,

whose name and address are:

If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. 

You also must file your answer or motion with the court.

CLERK OF COURT

Date:

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

Eastern District of Texas

RSB SPINE, LLC,

4:23-cv-00959-ALM

ORTHOFIX MEDICAL, INC., SEASPINE

HOLDINGS CORP., SEASPINE, INC., and

SEASPINE ORTHOPEDICS CORP.,

SeaSpine Holdings Corporation

c/o Corporation Service Company

251 Little Falls Drive

Wilmington, DE 19808

Mark D. Siegmund

Cherry Johnson Siegmund James, PLLC

400 Austin Ave., 9th Floor

Waco, TX 76701

10/27/2023

Case 4:23-cv-00959-ALM Document 5 Filed 10/27/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 384
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)

Civil Action No.

PROOF OF SERVICE

(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l))

This summons for (name of individual and title, if any)

was received by me on (date) .

u I personally served the summons on the individual at (place)

on (date) ; or

u I left the summons at the individual’s residence or usual place of abode with (name)

, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there,

on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individual’s last known address; or

u I served the summons on (name of individual) , who is

 designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization)

on (date) ; or

u I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or

u Other (specify):

.

My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ .

I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.

Date:

Server’s signature

Printed name and title

Server’s address

Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:

4:23-cv-00959-ALM

0.00

Case 4:23-cv-00959-ALM Document 5 Filed 10/27/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 385