alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SHERMAN DIVISION

CHRISTOPHER YOON,

Plaintiff, 

VS.

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS 

AMERICA, INC.,

Defendant. 

§

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

CASE NO.: 4:24-CV-179-ALM

DEFENDANT’S NOTICE OF NON-RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION FOR 

PARTIAL RELIEF FROM ORDER GOVERNING PROCEEDINGS AND TO STAY 

DISCOVERY PENDING RULING ON MOTION TO DISMISS OR, IN THE 

ALTERNATIVE, TO TRANSFER VENUE

Plaintiff Christopher Yoon’s (“Plaintiff”) deadline to oppose Defendant Samsung 

Electronics America, Inc. (“Samsung”) Motion for Partial Relief from the Court’s Order 

Governing Proceedings and to Stay Discovery Pending Ruling on Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss 

or, in the Alternative, to Transfer Venue [ECF No. 16] (“Motion”) was June 26, 2024. See Local 

Rule CV-7(e). To date, Plaintiff has neither filed a response in opposition to Defendant’s Motion 

nor requested an order from the Court to lengthen the response period. Plaintiff’s failure to file a 

response before his deadline or otherwise seek relief from the Court as to that deadline “creates a 

presumption that the party does not controvert the facts set out by movant and has no evidence to 

offer in opposition to the motion.” Local Rule CV-7(d); see Luraco Health & Beauty, LLC v. Vu 

Tran, Civ. Action No. 4:19-cv-51-SDJ, 2020 WL 2747233, at *2 (E.D. Tex. May 27, 2020) (“[I]f 

a party does not file a response to a motion, it is presumed that the party does not oppose the 

motion.”). Furthermore, in accordance with the Local Rules, Plaintiff’s failure to respond renders 

Defendant’s Motion ripe for the Court’s consideration and disposition. 

Case 4:24-cv-00179-ALM Document 18 Filed 06/28/24 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: 91
2 

Defendant respectfully requests that this Court consider Defendant’s Motion as unopposed 

and grant it the relief requested therein. 

Dated: June 28, 2024 Respectfully submitted,

/s/ James A. McGehee

Jonathan G. Rector 

Texas State Bar No. 24090347 

jrector@littler.com

James A. McGehee

Texas State Bar No. 24132520 

jmcgehee@littler.com

LITTLER MENDELSON, P.C.

2001 Ross Avenue, Suite 1500 

Dallas, TX 75201.2931 

214.880.8100 

214.880.0181 (Fax) 

ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT

Case 4:24-cv-00179-ALM Document 18 Filed 06/28/24 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 92
3 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that, on the 28th day of June, 2024, a copy of the foregoing document was sent to 

Plaintiff via the Court’s ECF notification system, email, and certified mail return receipt requested, 

as follows: 

Warren V. Norred 

Norred Law, PLLC 

515 E. Border St. 

Arlington, TX 76010 

817-704-3984 

warren@norredlaw.com 

Attorney for Plaintiff

/s/ James A. McGehee

James A. McGehee

4866-0241-9916.1 / 116494-1002

Case 4:24-cv-00179-ALM Document 18 Filed 06/28/24 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: 93
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from The
Consolidated Balance Sheets and Consolidated Statements of Operations found
on pages 18 and 19 in exhibit 13 of the Company's Form 10-K for the year,
and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                          11,744
<SECURITIES>                                    14,135
<RECEIVABLES>                                   23,643
<ALLOWANCES>                                       611
<INVENTORY>                                     26,817
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                82,413
<PP&E>                                          15,310
<DEPRECIATION>                                   3,735
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  96,430
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           23,189
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           604
<OTHER-SE>                                      72,085
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    96,430
<SALES>                                        127,043
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               127,043
<CGS>                                           64,417
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   64,417
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   242
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  64
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 13,738
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,808
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              8,930
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     8,930
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.65
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.65
        

</TABLE>
Case 2:23-cv-00409-JRG-RSP Document 41-5 Filed 04/02/24 Page 1 of 5 PageID #: 665
Case 2:23-cv-00409-JRG-RSP Document 41-5 Filed 04/02/24 Page 2 of 5 PageID #: 666
Case 2:23-cv-00409-JRG-RSP Document 41-5 Filed 04/02/24 Page 3 of 5 PageID #: 667
Case 2:23-cv-00409-JRG-RSP Document 41-5 Filed 04/02/24 Page 4 of 5 PageID #: 668
Case 2:23-cv-00409-JRG-RSP Document 41-5 Filed 04/02/24 Page 5 of 5 PageID #: 669
## COURT OF APPEALS
SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 12

- 00034

- CR

Eddie Calvin Dorris, II

v.

The State of Texas §

§

§

§

§ From t he 396th District Court

o f Tarrant County ( 1166471D )

February 14, 2013

Opinion by Justice McCoy

(nfp )



### JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that

there was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of

the trial court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By__________

_______________________ Justice Bob McCoy

## COURT OF APPEALS
SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 12

- 00 034

- CR NO. 02

- 12

- 00035

- CR

EDDIE CALVIN DORRIS

, II APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE

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

FROM THE 396TH DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY

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


### MEMORANDUM OPINION 1

------------
Appellant Eddie Calvin Dorris II appeals his two convictions for assault

after the trial court revoked his deferred adjudication community supervision

, adjudicated him guilty of both offenses , and sentenced him t o ten years’

confinement in each case concurrently but consecutive to his sentence for a third

assault convi ction.

1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.3

Do rris ’s court

- appointed appellate counsel has filed a motion to withdraw

as counsel and a brief in support of that motion. Counsel’s brief and motion meet

the requirements of Anders v. California by presenting a professional evaluation

of the reco rd demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds for relief. 386

U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967). Dorris had the opportunity to file a pro se brief

and has done so ; the State has not filed a brief.

Once an appellant’s court

- appointed attorney files a m otion to withdraw on

the ground that the appeal is frivolous and fulfills the requirements of Anders , this

court is obligated to undertake an independent examination of the record. See

Stafford v. State , 813 S.W.2d 503, 511 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); Mays v. State

, 904 S.W.2d 920, 922

– 23 (Tex. App.

— Fort Worth 1995, no pet.). Only then may

we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw. See Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75, 82

– 83, 109 S. Ct. 346, 351 (1988).

We hav e carefully reviewed the record

, counsel’s brief , and Dorris’s pro se

brief. We agree with counsel that this appeal is wholly frivolous and without

merit; we find nothing in the record that might arguably support the appeal. See

Bledsoe v. State , 178 S.W.3d 824, 827

– 28 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005); see also

Meza v. State , 206 S.W.3d 684, 685 n.6 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006). Accordingly, we

grant counsel’s motion to withdraw and affirm the trial court’s judgment.

BOB MCCOY JUSTICE4

PANEL: LIVINGSTON, C.J.; MCCOY and GABRIEL , J J

.
DO NOT PUBLISH Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED: February 14, 2013
Mark D. ZIMMERMAN, Petitioner, v. TEXAS.

No. 19-7196.

Supreme Court of the United States.

March 9, 2020.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Texas, Fifth District denied.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

QUINTICA RAINES
, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA
, Appellee

.

No. 4D 22

- 2753

[ January 19, 2023 ]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Martin S. Fein, Judge;

L.T. Case No. 18

- 004305

- CF

- 10A

.

Quintica Raines, Trenton , pro se.

No appearance for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affi rmed.

G ROSS

, D AMOORGIAN and C IKLIN
, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Mark Douglas ROBISON, Petitioner, v. TEXAS

No. 19-183

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Texas, Fourteenth District denied.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

KORY T. O’BRIEN, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 v. 

K. E. SAID; et al., 

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 18-16864 

D.C. No. 1:18-cv-00741-LJO-SAB 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Lawrence J. O’Neill, Chief Judge, Presiding

Submitted February 19, 2019**

Before: FERNANDEZ, SILVERMAN, and WATFORD, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Kory T. O’Brien appeals pro se from the district 

court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate 

indifference to his serious medical needs. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1291. We review de novo. Watison v. Carter, 668 F.3d 1108, 1112 (9th Cir. 

 

* 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

FEB 22 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 18-16864 

2012) (28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii)); Wilhelm v. Rotman, 680 F.3d 1113, 1118

(9th Cir. 2012) (28 U.S.C. § 1915A). We affirm in part, reverse in part, and 

remand.

The district court properly dismissed O’Brien’s deliberate indifference claim 

against defendants Drs. Shiesha, Baniga, and Moustafa because O’Brien failed to 

allege facts sufficient to show that these defendants were deliberately indifferent in 

treating O’Brien’s high cholesterol. See Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1057 

(9th Cir. 2004) (a prison official acts with deliberate indifference only if he or she 

knows of and disregards an excessive risk to the prisoner’s health); Starr v. Baca, 

652 F.3d 1202, 1207 (9th Cir. 2011) (supervisors are not vicariously liable under 

§ 1983 for the culpable conduct of their subordinates).

The district court, however, erroneously dismissed O’Brien’s deliberate 

indifference claim against Dr. El Said. O’Brien alleged in the amended complaint

that Dr. El Said knew of O’Brien’s high cholesterol, failed to provide treatment, 

further failed to inform O’Brien regarding his condition, and that O’Brien suffered 

harm as a result. These allegations, liberally construed, are “sufficient to warrant 

... an answer.” See Wilhelm, 680 F.3d at 1116, 1122-23. We reverse the judgment 

as to the claim against Dr. El Said only and remand for further proceedings.

AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED.
Exhibit D

Redacted in Entirety

Case 2:24-cv-00021-JRG Document 54-5 Filed 07/18/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 3118
```
 
 
WHEAT - MINNEAPOLIS GRAIN EXCHANGE                                   Code-001626
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 11/06/12                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 5,000 BUSHELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:       41,861
COMMITMENTS
  10,033    2,361    1,329   19,395   29,209   30,757   32,899   11,104    8,962

CHANGES FROM 10/30/12 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:       -789)
     428       61     -126     -654       50     -352      -15     -437     -774

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    24.0      5.6      3.2     46.3     69.8     73.5     78.6     26.5     21.4

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       57)
      19        4        8       27       27       48       38
```

----

Updated November 9, 2012
Arthur Ray DEERE, Sr., Petitioner, v. CALIFORNIA.

No. 19-5378

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of California denied.
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### National Science Foundation

# AGENCY:

National Science Foundation.

# ACTION:

Notice of permit issued.

# SUMMARY:

The National Science Foundation (NSF) is required to publish notice of permits issued under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978. This is the required notice.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Andrew Titmus ACA Permit Officer, Office of Polar Programs, National Science Foundation, 2415 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA 22314; 703-292-4479; email:                         *ACApermits@nsf.gov.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    On April 26, 2022, the National Science Foundation published a notice in the                     **Federal Register**                     of a permit application received. The permit was issued on May 31, 2022, to:                

## Permit No. 2023-001

1. Dr. Michelle Shero 

Erika N. Davis,

Program Specialist, Office of Polar Programs.

[FR Doc. 2022-12412 Filed 6-8-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
Dmitry PRONIN, Petitioner, v. Charles WRIGHT, et al.

No. 19-7306.

Supreme Court of the United States.

March 23, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
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 XR Communications, LLC, dba Vivato Technologies T-MOBILE USA, INC. 2:23-cv-00469 XR Communications, LLC, dba Vivato Technologies 10/06/2023 /s/ Paul A. Kroeger Paul A. Kroeger (CA SBN 229074)

Russ August & Kabat 

12424 Wilshire Blvd., 12th Floor 

Los Angeles, CA 90025 

pkroeger@raklaw.com (310) 826-7474 (310) 826-6991 Print Save As... Reset

Case 2:23-cv-00469-JRG-RSP Document 11 Filed 10/09/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 688
**EXHIBIT 31.2****Certification of Principal Financial Officer**I, Antony W. Boor, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K/A of Brightpoint, Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report.        Date: April 27, 2007 /s/ Anthony W. Boor   Anthony W. Boor   Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer(Principal Financial Officer)
III 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 43 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 10, 2013 

Received 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Authorizing the use of Emancipation Hall in the Capitol 

Visitor Center for a ceremony honoring the life and 

legacy of Nelson Mandela on the occasion of the 95th 

anniversary of his birth. 

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 

2 concurring), 

3 SECTION 1. USE OF EMANCIPATION HALL FOR CEREMONY 

4 HONORING NELSON MANDELA. 

5 Emancipation Hall in the Capitol Visitor Center is 

6 authorized to be used on July 18, 2013, for a ceremony 

7 honoring the life and legacy of Nelson Mandela on the 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

HCON 43 RDS 

1 occasion of the 95th anniversary of his birth. Physical 

2 preparations for the ceremony shall be carried out in ac3 cordance with such conditions as the Architect of the Cap4 itol may prescribe. 

Passed the House of Representatives July 9, 2013. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Lajbar Lajaward KHAN, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-7812.

Supreme Court of the United States.

March 30, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
CROSSMANN COMMUNITIES, INC.
ARTICLE 5 FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE FOR 1997
(dollars in thousands, except per share data)

The schedule contains summary financial information extracted from
the consolidated financial statements of Crossmann Communities, Inc.
and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial
statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>                     
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997            
<CASH>                                          100000            
<SECURITIES>                                         0            
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0            
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0            
<INVENTORY>                                  137561653            
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0            
<PP&E>                                         4986589            
<DEPRECIATION>                                 1962790            
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               155980065           
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0            
<BONDS>                                       66101609            
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0            
<PREFERRED>                                          0            
<COMMON>                                      25290069            
<OTHER-SE>                                    41041836            
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 155980065 
<SALES>                                      116360129
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             116360129
<CGS>                                         92638587
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 92638587 
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0 
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0 
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              589250 
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                9740850 
<INCOME-TAX>                                   3947470 
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            5793380
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0 
<CHANGES>                                            0 
<NET-INCOME>                                   5793380 
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .63 
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .62 
        


</TABLE>
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         June 9, 2022.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on May 31, 2022, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Parcel Select Contract 49 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2022-63, CP2022-69.                

Sean Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2022-12388 Filed 6-8-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```

```

----

Updated March 18, 2014
United States Court of Appeals

For the First Circuit

No. 05-2015

CHARLES J. SENIOR; NORMAN FAHY; RONALD D. PHIPPS; RAYMOND W.

POSTMA; THOMAS G. HIRL; GARRETT M. FAGAN; UNITED STEELWORKERS OF

AMERICA, LOCAL 12004,

Plaintiffs, Appellants,

v.

NSTAR ELECTRIC AND GAS CORPORATION; COMMONWEALTH GAS COMPANY,

Defendants, Appellees.

ERRATA SHEET

The opinion of this court, issued May 31, 2006, should

be amended as follows:

On page 14, line 6: Replace "insured" with "ensured"

On page 29, line 20: Replace "only ten" with "ninety"