alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```
 
 
MSCI EAFE MINI INDEX - NYSE LIFFE                                    Code-244041
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 04/30/13                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(MSCI EAFE INDEX X $50)                              OPEN INTEREST:       85,875
COMMITMENTS
  22,382    2,791    1,748   55,325   79,046   79,455   83,585    6,420    2,290

CHANGES FROM 04/23/13 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:        529)
  -1,166     -105        3      641      439     -522      337    1,051      192

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    26.1      3.3      2.0     64.4     92.0     92.5     97.3      7.5      2.7

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       76)
      12        4        1       40       34       52       39
 
 
MSCI EMERGING MKTS MINI INDEX - NYSE LIFFE                           Code-244042
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 04/30/13                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(MSCI EAFE INDEX X $50)                              OPEN INTEREST:      200,714
COMMITMENTS
  64,628   37,362    1,219  120,183  155,760  186,030  194,341   14,684    6,373

CHANGES FROM 04/23/13 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:      1,584)
    -405     -386       32    3,142    2,364    2,769    2,010   -1,185     -426

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    32.2     18.6      0.6     59.9     77.6     92.7     96.8      7.3      3.2

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      146)
      34       17        8       72       50      111       70
```

----

Updated May 3, 2013
Alphonso I. WATERS, Jr., Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-1032.

Supreme Court of the United States.

March 23, 2020

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

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SYMBOLOGY INNOVATIONS, LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

DEXCOM, INC.,

Defendants. 

 Case No. 2:23-cv-473-JRG

 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

NOTICE OF COMPLIANCE WITH PATENT RULE 3-1 AND 3-2

In accordance with the Order Governing Proceedings issued in this case, Plaintiff

Symbology files and serves this notification that today, January 4, 2024, Plaintiff has served its 

Preliminary Infringement Contentions and otherwise complied with Patent Rule 3-1 and 3-2

against Dexcom, Inc. (“Defendant”).

The expiration date of the Asserted Patent Claims is September 15, 2030.

To the extent Defendant challenges either the priority date or the expiration date of any 

Asserted Patent or of individual Asserted Claim, Plaintiff contends that any such challenge must 

be raised with specificity contemporaneous with Defendant’s Invalidity Contentions. Given the 

central importance of the priority date (the “date of invention”) to the issues of claim 

construction and validity, Plaintiff will move to preclude any such argument or challenge not

timely raised. Again, Plaintiff notifies Defendant of the Court’s Standing Orders as it did 

previously in a communication made on or about January 2, 2024, and even attached a copy 

of the Court’s Standing Order Regarding Subject Matter Eligibility Contentions. 

 Dated: January 4, 2024

Case 2:23-cv-00473-JRG Document 9 Filed 01/04/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 161
Respectfully Submitted

/s/ Randall Garteiser

M. Scott Fuller

 Texas Bar No. 24036607

 sfuller@ghiplaw.com

Randall Garteiser 

 Texas Bar No. 24038912

 rgarteiser@ghiplaw.com

Christopher A. Honea

 Texas Bar No. 24059967

 chonea@ghiplaw.com

GARTEISER HONEA, PLLC

119 W. Ferguson Street

Tyler, Texas 75702

Telephone: (903) 705-7420

Facsimile: (903) 405-3999

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF

Certificate of Service

I, Randall Garteiser, certify that this filing was served via counsel of record via the 

Court’s ECF / Pacer system on January 4, 2024.

/s/ Randall Garteiser

Randall Garteiser

Case 2:23-cv-00473-JRG Document 9 Filed 01/04/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 162
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

 

SYMBOLOGY INNOVATIONS, LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

VALVE CORPORATION,

GEARBOX SOFTWARE, L.L.C.,

Defendants.

 CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:23-cv-419

 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

ORDER

The Court, having considered the Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to 

Defendant Valve Corporation’s Motion to Dismiss filed at Docket 11, 

GRANTS the Motion. 

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the deadline for the Plaintiff to submit its Response 

shall be extended up to and including December 4, 2023. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Case 2:23-cv-00419-JRG Document 14-1 Filed 11/20/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 165
Mustafa Hasan ARIF, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-6660.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 7, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit denied.
Roger Lee OZIER, petitioner, v. Shirlee HARRY, Warden.

No. 18-6724.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 14, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
UAET (02-2008)

Unopposed Application for Extension of Time to Answer Complaint

Attach this form to the Application for Extension of Time to Answer Complaint event.

CASE AND DEADLINE INFORMATION

Civil Action No.:

Name of party requesting extension:

Is this the first application for extension of time in this case? Yes

No

If no, please indicate which application this represents: Second

Third

Other ___________

Date of Service of Summons:

Number of days requested: 30 days

15 days

Other _____ days

New Deadline Date: (Required)

ATTORNEY FILING APPLICATION INFORMATION

Full Name:

State Bar No.:

Firm Name:

Address:

Phone:

Fax:

Email:

A certificate of conference does not need to be filed with this unopposed application.

2:23-cv-00423-JRG-RSP

Defendants

9/19/2023

43

11/22/2023

Nicholas G. Papastavros

MA BBO #635742

DLA Piper LLP (US)

33 Arch Street, 26th Floor

Boston, MA 02110

(617) 406-6019

(617) 406-6119

nick.papastavros@dlapiper.com

Case 2:23-cv-00423-JRG-RSP Document 12 Filed 10/05/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 124
Christopher John KERR, petitioner, v. WISCONSIN.

No. 18-6844.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 7, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Wisconsin denied.
```
 
 
CRUDE OIL, LIGHT SWEET - ICE FUTURES EUROPE                          Code-067411
OPTION AND FUTURES COMBINED POSITIONS AS OF 07/30/13          |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  Long  | Short  |Spreads |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 1,000 BARRELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:      809,302
COMMITMENTS
  99,899   32,180  259,202  434,581  495,580  793,681  786,961   15,621   22,340

CHANGES FROM 07/23/13 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:     11,301)
  -3,972    1,487    8,396    5,484     -622    9,908    9,261    1,394    2,040

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADER
    12.3      4.0     32.0     53.7     61.2     98.1     97.2      1.9      2.8

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      160)
      52       32       66       65       68      143      143
```

----

Updated August 2, 2013
Ronald DAMON, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-7126

Supreme Court of the United States.

Feb. 24, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
Dennis David ANTWINE, Petitioner, v. BRANCH CIRCUIT JUDGE.

No. 19-6835

Supreme Court of the United States.

Feb. 24, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Michigan denied.
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: Anheuser-Busch, L.L.C. v. Harris County Tax Assessor-Collector

Appellate case number: 01-15-00422-CV

Trial court case number: 2013-72388

Trial court: 55th District Court of Harris County

Appellant’s Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief is GRANTED. 

The District Clerk is ORDERED to file a supplemental record including the summary 

judgment exhibits previously requested by appellant within 10 days of the date of this order.

Appellant’s brief will be due within 30 days after the date the supplemental record is filed 

in this Court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.6(a). 

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Rebeca Huddle

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: July 7, 2015
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

IP BUDS, LLC,

 Plaintiff,

v.

SAMSUNG ELCTRONICS AMERICA, 

INC. 

Defendant.

Civil Action No. 2:23-CV-00475-JRG

ORDER

Before the Court is Plaintiff IP Buds, LLC’s and Defendant Samsung Electronics America, 

Inc.’s Joint Motion for Extension of Certain Deadlines. After consideration of the same, 

the Court is of the opinion that the Motion should be and is hereby GRANTED. 

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the deadline for the Parties to file their 

Proposed Docket Control Order and Proposed Discovery Order is extended up to and 

including March 4, 2024. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the deadline for the Parties to file their Proposed 

Protective Order is extended up to and including March 11, 2024. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the deadline for Samsung to serve its Invalidity 

Contentions pursuant to P.R. 3-3 and 3-4—including the corresponding technical documents—

and its Subject-Matter Eligibility Contentions pursuant to the Court’s Standing Order is extended 

up to and including April 1, 2024

Case 2:23-cv-00475-JRG-RSP Document 14-1 Filed 01/24/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 54
LOGO



| |  |  | CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
| | - |  | ----------------------------



| |  |  | BUSINESS ADVISORS
| | - |  | -----------------



| |  |  | TECHNOLOGY CONSULTANTS
| | - |  | ----------------------



---

5110 Maryland Way

Suite 350

Brentwood, TN 37027

615 370 3663 phone

615 373 9917 fax

www.rodefermoss.com

Exhibit 23.2

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference of Post-Effective Amendment to Form S-1 of Registration Statement No. 333-96905, Post-Effective Amendment to Form S-1 of Registration Statement No. 333-119473, Amendment No. 2 to Form
S-1 of Registration Statement No. 333-134220 and Registration Statement No. 333-139719 on Form S-8 of ACT Teleconferencing, Inc in our report dated March 30, 2007 (which report expresses an unqualified opinion), appearing in this
Annual Report on Form 10-K of ACT Teleconferencing, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2006

Rodefer Moss & Co., PLLC

LOGO

Brentwood, Tennessee

March 30, 2007

GREENEVILLE  KNOXVILLE  BRENTWOOD
TRI-CITIES
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.10

US Diagnostic Inc. Letterhead


November 6, 2000

David McIntosh
7932 Flagler Court South
West Palm Beach, FL  33405

Dear Dave:


         Please be advised that the Letter Agreement dated April 27, 2000
between you and US Diagnostic is extended to include November and December, 2000
and January and February, 2001, on the same terms and conditions in the original
letter.

         If you should have any questions, please let me know.

Sincerely,



/s/ Joseph A. Paul
---------------------------------------
    Joseph A. Paul
    President & Chief Executive Officer
AO 458 (Rev. 06/09) Appearance of Counsel

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

__________ District of __________

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff

v. Case No.

Defendant

APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL

To: The clerk of court and all parties of record

I am admitted or otherwise authorized to practice in this court, and I appear in this case as counsel for:

.

Date:

Attorney’s signature

Printed name and bar number

Address

E-mail address

Telephone number

FAX number

 Eastern District of Texas

Valtrus Innovations Ltd.

AT&T Inc., et al

2:23cv444

Valtrus Innovations Ltd.

09/27/2023 /s/ Garrett Parish

Garrett Parish; State Bar No. 24125824

1507 Bill Owens Parkway

Longview, Texas 75604

gparish@wsfirm.com

(903) 757-6400

(903) 757-2323

Case 2:23-cv-00444-JRG Document 6 Filed 09/27/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 324
Dominique BEEKS, Petitioner, v. HMC ASSETS, LLC.

No. 19M11

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Motion to direct the Clerk to file a petition for a writ of certiorari out of time denied.
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

TYLER DIVISION

AUTHOR J. MANNING, JR.,

 Plaintiff,

v.

TIME WARNER BROS DISCOVER, et al.

 Defendants.

§

§

§

§ 

§ 

§

§

§

§

§

§

CASE NO. 6:23-CV-529-JDK-KNM

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

On October 27, 2023, Plaintiff Author Manning Jr., proceeding pro se, filed with this Court

a document entitled “Motion for Removal Motion to Move the Case.” Doc. No. 1. This document

appears to be Plaintiff’s attempt to remove his state-court case to federal court. This case was

referred to the undersigned on October 31, 2023. Doc. No. 2.

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1441, only a defendant may remove a case from state court to federal

court because plaintiffs have the benefit of choosing their preferred forum at the outset. See Jerry

Fam. of Sark v. Fed. Home Loan Mortg. Corp., 161 F. App'x 367 (5th Cir. 2005) (“[P]laintiffs

cannot ‘remove’ to federal court a case they chose to file in state court.”). Plaintiff’s motion should

not be construed as an original complaint because the filing fee has not been paid and Plaintiff has

not filed a motion to proceed in forma pauperis.

RECOMMENDATION

The Court recommends that Plaintiff’s motion to remove (Doc. No. 1) is DENIED and that

the case is REMANDED to the 114th Judicial District Court of Smith County, Texas immediately

and without the delay provided for in Local Rule CV-83(b).

Case 6:23-cv-00529-JDK-KNM Document 7 Filed 11/17/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 22
2

Within fourteen (14) days after service of the magistrate judge's report, any party must 

serve and file specific written objections to the findings and recommendations of the magistrate 

judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). To be specific, an objection must identify the specific finding or 

recommendation to which objection is made, state the basis for the objection, and specify the place 

in the magistrate judge's report and recommendation where the disputed determination is found. 

An objection that merely incorporates by reference or refers to the briefing before the magistrate 

judge is not specific.

Failure to file specific, written objections will bar the party from appealing the unobjectedto factual findings and legal conclusions of the magistrate judge that are accepted by the district 

court, except upon grounds of plain error, provided that the party has been served with notice that 

such consequences will result from a failure to object. See Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass'n,

79 F.3d 1415, 1417 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc), superseded by statute on other grounds, 28 U.S.C. 

§ 636(b)(1) (extending the time to file objections from ten to fourteen days).

Case 6:23-cv-00529-JDK-KNM Document 7 Filed 11/17/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 23
```
 
 
MSCI EAFE MINI INDEX - NYSE LIFFE                                    Code-244041
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 10/15/13                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(MSCI EAFE INDEX X $50)                              OPEN INTEREST:       79,197
COMMITMENTS
  25,232    3,150    3,764   43,868   70,011   72,864   76,925    6,333    2,272

CHANGES FROM 10/08/13 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:       -689)
  -1,754        8      -44      877     -645     -921     -681      232       -8

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    31.9      4.0      4.8     55.4     88.4     92.0     97.1      8.0      2.9

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       83)
      15        4        1       41       39       56       44
 
 
MSCI EMERGING MKTS MINI INDEX - NYSE LIFFE                           Code-244042
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 10/15/13                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(MSCI EAFE INDEX X $50)                              OPEN INTEREST:      268,725
COMMITMENTS
  87,394   39,330    1,077  165,320  220,974  253,791  261,381   14,934    7,344

CHANGES FROM 10/08/13 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:     21,784)
   2,462   10,385   -1,130   19,068   10,607   20,400   19,862    1,384    1,922

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    32.5     14.6      0.4     61.5     82.2     94.4     97.3      5.6      2.7

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      177)
      53       21       12       77       56      136       83
```

----

Updated October 30, 2013
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 6 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 6

         To make effective appointment of Senate Legal Counsel.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 5, 2011

   Mr. Reid (for himself and Mr. McConnell) submitted the following 
             resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
         To make effective appointment of Senate Legal Counsel.

    Resolved, That the appointment of Morgan J. Frankel of the District 
of Columbia to be Senate Legal Counsel, made by the President pro 
tempore this day, shall become effective as of January 7, 2011, and the 
term of service of the appointee shall expire at the end of the One 
Hundred Thirteenth Congress.
                                 <all>
```
Jared Len CRUSE, Petitioner, v. TEXAS

No. 19-5002

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               Jun-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           1,606
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   24,475
<ALLOWANCES>                                     6,389
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                88,642
<PP&E>                                       2,054,166
<DEPRECIATION>                                 161,011
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,981,797
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           90,544
<BONDS>                                      1,289,026
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        101
<COMMON>                                           433
<OTHER-SE>                                     581,488
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,981,797
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               154,887
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  137,912
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,151
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,249
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              43,725
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 16,975
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             16,975
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  2,106
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    14,335
<EPS-BASIC>                                     0.37
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.04


</TABLE>
No. 6:23-cv-00508

John A. Grimes,

Plaintiff,

v.

Unknown Holman et al.,

Defendants.

ORDER

Plaintiff John A. Grimes, an inmate of the Texas Department of 

Criminal Justice proceeding pro se, asserted a claim of excessive heat 

that was unrelated to the other claims in his previous civil rights lawsuit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Doc. 2. Accordingly, the court severed 

the heat claim into this new action (Doc. 1), which was referred to 

United States Magistrate Judge K. Nicole Mitchell pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. § 636(b).

On December 14, 2023, the magistrate judge issued a report recommending that this case be dismissed without prejudice due to 

plaintiff’s failure to comply with the court’s order to satisfy the filing 

fee requirement for this case and to file an amended complaint. Doc. 

6. A copy of the report was mailed to plaintiff, who received it on 

December 22, 2023, but he did not file written objections. Doc. 8.

When no party objects to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, the court reviews it only for clear error. See Douglass 

v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1420 (5th Cir. 1996). Having reviewed the magistrate judge’s report, and being satisfied that it 

contains no clear error, the court accepts its findings and recommendation. This case is dismissed without prejudice.

Case 6:23-cv-00508-JCB-KNM Document 9 Filed 02/14/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 53
- 2 -

So ordered by the court on February 14, 2024.

J. CAMPBELL BARKER

United States District Judge

Case 6:23-cv-00508-JCB-KNM Document 9 Filed 02/14/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 54