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

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

BEAUMONT DIVISION

JOSEPH BOND, on behalf of himself and 

others similarly situated,

 Plaintiff,

VS.

FOLSOM INSURANCE AGENCY LLC, 

CODY FOLSOM, and BERKSHIRE 

HATHAWAY HOMESTATE COMPANIES,

 Defendants.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

 CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:24-CV-00075

 JUDGE MICHAEL J. TRUNCALE

ORDER GRANTING STIPULATED MOTION TO TRANSFER TO THE

NORTHENER DISTRICT OF TEXAS, DALLAS DIVISION

Before the Court is the Parties’ Stipulated Motion to Transfer to the Northern District of Texas, Dallas 

Division. [Dkt. 15]. Plaintiff filed this matter on February 29, 2024 [Dkt. 1] and filed a First Amended 

Complaint on May 9, 2024 [Dkt. 6]. Defendants Cody Folsom and Folsom Insurance Agency, LLC filed 

answer on August 7, 2024. [Dkt. 12]. The Parties file the present motion requesting this matter be transferred 

to the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division, because Defendant had its headquarters and principal place 

of business in Mabank, Texas, at the time of the incident at issue, which lies within Kaufman County in the 

Dallas Division of the Northern District of Texas. For convenience of the Parties, they file this motion. After 

considering the Parties’ stipulated motion and reviewing the pleadings on file and all applicable law, the 

Court grants the same.

It is therefore ORDERED that the Parties’ Stipulated Motion to Transfer to the Northern District of 

Texas, Dallas Division [Dkt. 15] is hereby GRANTED. The Clerk is INSTRUCTED to transfer this matter 

to the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division.

____________________________

Michael J. Truncale

United States District Judge SIGNED this 18th day of September, 2024.

Case 1:24-cv-00075-MJT Document 17 Filed 09/18/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 72
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.                  

###### Department of Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 

Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings: 

## Filings in Existing Proceedings

*Docket Numbers:*                     RP21-788-001.                

*Applicants:*                     ANR Pipeline Company.                

*Description:*                     Compliance filing: Operational Purchase and Sales Report 2021—Revised to be effective N/A.                

*Filed Date:*                     5/25/22.                

*Accession Number:*                     20220525-5022.                

*Comment Date:*                     5 p.m. ET 6/6/22.                

*Docket Numbers:*                     RP22-858-001.                

*Applicants:*                     ANR Pipeline Company.                

*Description:*                     Compliance filing: Operational Purchase and Sales Report 2022—Amendment to be effective N/A.                

*Filed Date:*                     5/25/22.                

*Accession Number:*                     20220525-5026.                

*Comment Date:*                     5 p.m. ET 6/6/22.                

                    Any person desiring to protest in any the above proceedings must file in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211) on or before 5:00 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date.  The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system (                    *https://elibrary.ferc.gov/​idmws/​search/​fercgensearch.asp*) by querying the docket number.                

                    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying facilities filings can be found at:                     *http://www.ferc.gov/​docs-filing/​efiling/​filing-req.pdf.*                     For other information, call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.                

Dated: May 25, 2022.

Debbie-Anne A. Reese,

Deputy Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2022-11725 Filed 5-31-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
Cemaludin VESELI, II, Petitioner, v. Carla HACKER-AGNEW, Warden, et al.

No. 19-7846.

Supreme Court of the United States.

April 20, 2020

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

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

HOUSTON DIVISION

WILLIAM BINGHAM,

(TDCJ–CID #02050376), 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

CAPTAIN 

CHRISTOPHER 

FARRELL, et al,

Defendants. 

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

CIVIL ACTION NO

4:23-cv-04386

JUDGE CHARLES ESKRIDGE

MEMORANDUM ON TRANSFER

Pending is a complaint under 42 USC § 1983 filed by 

Plaintiff William Bingham. Dkt 1.

Plaintiff proceeds here pro se. He brings this action 

against prison officials at the Wainwright Unit of the Texas 

Department of Criminal Justice—Correctional Institutions 

Division. He sues for violations of civil rights that allegedly 

occurred there.

The Wainwright Unit is located in Houston County, 

within the Eastern District of Texas, Lufkin Division. 

The interests of justice and the convenience of parties 

and witnesses support transfer of this action to the United 

States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, 

Lufkin Division. 28 USC §§ 1391, 1404(a).

This action is TRANSFERRED to the United States 

District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Lufkin 

Division.

United States District Court

Southern District of Texas

ENTERED

December 18, 2023

Nathan Ochsner, Clerk

Case 9:23-cv-00228-MAC-CLS Document 4 Filed 12/18/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 29
2

The motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed 

by William Bingham is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE to 

reconsideration after transfer. Dkt 2.

SO ORDERED.

Signed on , at Houston, Texas.

__________________________

Hon. Charles Eskridge

United States District Judge

December 18, 2023

Case 9:23-cv-00228-MAC-CLS Document 4 Filed 12/18/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 30
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

DISPLAY TECHNOLOGIES, LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

ROCHE DIABETES CARE, LTD.,

Defendant.

Case No. 2:23-cv-00585-JRG-RSP

PATENT CASE

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

SUPPLEMENTAL NOTICE OF NON-OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT

ROCHE DIABETES CARE LIMITED’S MOTION TO DISMISS

Pursuant to Local Rule CV-7(e), Roche Diabetes Care Limited (“RDC Limited”) submits 

this supplemental notice of non-opposition regarding its pending Motion to Dismiss for Lack of 

Personal Jurisdiction, which was filed on May 8, 2024. See Dkt. No. 21. Plaintiff’s response was 

due May 23, 2024, but no response was filed and no extension was requested. Plaintiff has also 

failed to serve its infringement contentions, which were originally due on May 15, 2024. See Dkt. 

No. 13. RDC Limited agreed to an extension to June 25, 2024—one week ago—but Plaintiff has 

still not served its contentions or sought an extension. See Dkt. No. 35.

This Court recently granted an unopposed motion in a nearly identical situation. See 

Symbology Innovations, LLC v. Roche Diagnostics GMBH Ltd., E.D.Tex. 2:23-cv-00630-JRG, 

Dkt. No. 14 (Gilstrap, J.). In that case, another Roche entity filed a similar Motion to Dismiss

based on lack of personal jurisdiction, and the motion went unopposed by counsel for Plaintiff. Id. 

The Court thus found “that it ha[d] little alternative but to grant the Motion” and dismissed the 

case with prejudice. Id.

Case 2:23-cv-00585-JRG-RSP Document 37 Filed 07/02/24 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: 954
2

RDC Limited thus respectfully requests the Court deem its Motion unopposed and dismiss 

this case with prejudice. See Local Rule CV-7(e) (“(e) Time to File Response. A party opposing 

a motion has fourteen days (twenty-one days for summary judgment motions) from the date the 

motion was served in which to file a response and any supporting documents, after which the court 

will consider the submitted motion for decision.”).

Dated: July 2, 2024 Respectfully submitted,

By: /s/ Aaron P. Pirouznia

Terry J. Stalford

Texas Bar No. 24011686

stalford@fr.com

Aaron P. Pirouznia

Texas Bar No. 24098958

pirouznia@fr.com

Noel F. Chakkalakal

Texas Bar No. 24053676

chakkalakal@fr.com

Alexander H. Martin

Texas Bar No. 24091828

martin@fr.com

FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.

1717 Main Street, Suite 5000

Dallas, TX 75201

Telephone: (214) 747-5070

COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT

ROCHE DIABETES CARE, LIMITED

Case 2:23-cv-00585-JRG-RSP Document 37 Filed 07/02/24 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 955
3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

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

document has been served on July 2, 2024, to all counsel of record who are deemed to have 

consented to electronic service via the Court’s CM/ECF system. 

/s/ Aaron P. Pirouznia

Aaron P. Pirouznia

Case 2:23-cv-00585-JRG-RSP Document 37 Filed 07/02/24 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: 956
Exhibit 14 

 

Case 2:23-cv-00576-JRG-RSP Document 26-23 Filed 01/29/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 1360
Case 2:23-cv-00576-JRG-RSP Document 26-23 Filed 01/29/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 1361
IV 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 55 

Expressing the sense of Congress that Taiwan and its 23,000,000 people 

deserve membership in the United Nations. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 17, 2013 

Mr. GARRETT (for himself, Mr. BARTON, and Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON

of Texas) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of Congress that Taiwan and its 

23,000,000 people deserve membership in the United 

Nations. 

Whereas for more than 50 years a close relationship has existed between the United States and Taiwan, which has 

been of major economic, cultural, and strategic advantage 

to both countries; 

Whereas the 23,000,000 people in Taiwan are not represented in the United Nations; 

Whereas Taiwan has over the years repeatedly expressed its 

strong desire to participate in the United Nations; 

Whereas Taiwan has much to contribute to the work and 

funding of the United Nations; 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HCON 55 IH 

Whereas the world community has reacted positively to Taiwan’s desire for international participation, as shown by 

Taiwan’s membership in the Asian Development Bank, 

Taiwan’s admission to the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation group as a full member, and Taiwan’s membership in the World Trade Organization, and Taiwan’s participation in the World Health Organization; and 

Whereas section 4(d) of the Taiwan Relations Act (22 U.S.C. 

3303(d)) declares, ‘‘Nothing in this Act may be construed as a basis for supporting the exclusion or expulsion of Taiwan from continued membership in any international financial institution or any other international 

organization.’’: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 

2 concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that Taiwan 

3 and its 23,000,000 people deserve membership in the 

4 United Nations. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
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

Case 2:23-cv-00485 Document 5 Filed 10/17/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 73
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 96-2754
ANTONIO A. GUTLIFFE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus SHIRLEY S. CHATER, COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Chief District Judge. (CA-95-123-7-F2) Submitted: June 19, 1997 Decided: June 26, 1997 Before WILKINS and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Antonio A. Gutliffe, Appellant Pro Se. Barbara Dickerson Kocher, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM:Appellant appeals the district court's order affirming a decision of the Commissioner of Social Security to deny a waiver to recovery of an overpayment of disability benefits. We have reviewedthe record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magist rate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Gutliffe v. Chater, Comm’r Soc. Sec. , No. CA-95-123-7-F2 (E.D.N.C. Oct. 24, 1996). 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
* 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

February 7, 2007

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-10584

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

SANTOS CUETO-PARRA, also known as Jose Santos Morales, also 

known as Santos Cueyo, also known as Santos Cueto Parva, also

known as Angel Rodriguez,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas 

USDC No. 4:04-CR-129-ALL

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

Before REAVLEY, JOLLY, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Santos CuetoParra raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres

v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that

8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate

criminal offense. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance

is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
III 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 92 

To authorize the payment of legal expenses of Senate employees out of 

the contingent fund of the Senate. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 3, 2011 

Mr. SCHUMER (for himself and Mr. ALEXANDER) submitted the following 

resolution; which was considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

To authorize the payment of legal expenses of Senate 

employees out of the contingent fund of the Senate. 

1 Resolved, 

2 SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF THE PAYMENT OF LEGAL 

3 EXPENSES. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Committee on Rules and Ad5 ministration is authorized to pay out of the contingent 

6 fund of the Senate the legal expenses incurred by Jean 

7 Manning and Erica Watkins for the employment of private 

8 counsel to represent them with respect to official actions 

9 and responsibilities before the grand jury in the United 

10 States District Court for the District of Columbia. 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 92 ATS 

1 (b) DETERMINATION.—The amount of expenses paid 

2 pursuant to subsection (a) shall be determined by the 

3 Committee on Rules and Administration. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with BILLS
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

MARSHALL DIVISION 

VIRTAMOVE, CORP., 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

HEWLETT PACKARD ENTERPRISE 

COMPANY, 

Defendant. 

Civil Action No. 2:24-CV-00093-JRG 

(Lead Case) 

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 

VIRTAMOVE, CORP., 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES 

CORP., 

Defendant.

Civil Action No. 2:24-CV-00064-JRG 

(Member Case) 

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

ORDER 

Before the Court is Defendant HPE’s Opposed Motion to Transfer Venue Pursuant to 28 

U.S.C. § 1404. Having considered the same, the Court hereby GRANTS the motion. The Clerk’s 

Office is hereby ORDERED to transfer VirtaMove Corp. v. Hewlett Packard Enterprise Co., 2:24-

cv-93 to the Northern District of California. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Case 2:24-cv-00093-JRG Document 95-22 Filed 10/23/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 4789
Shawndell M. McFARLIN, petitioner, v. Scott S. HARRIS, Clerk, Supreme Court of the United States, et al.

No. 17-9363.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 7, 2019.

Petition for rehearing denied.
Taurus CARROLL, Petitioner, v. ALABAMA.

No. 19-7456.

Supreme Court of the United States.

May 26, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Alabama denied.
# C_2018012EN.01001202.xml

| 13.1.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 12/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.1.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 12/12

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.8640 — CVC/Blackstone/Paysafe)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2018/C 12/03)

On 21 November 2017, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32017M8640. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32017M8640. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  
  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
III 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 121 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

DECEMBER 8, 2014 

Received 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Providing for a correction in the enrollment of the bill H.R. 

3979. 

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 

2 concurring), That in the enrollment of the bill H.R. 3979, 

3 the Clerk of the House of Representatives shall correct 

4 the title so as to read: ‘‘An Act to authorize appropriations 

5 for fiscal year 2015 for military activities of the Depart6 ment of Defense, for military construction, and for defense 

7 activities of the Department of Energy, to prescribe miliVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:18 Dec 16, 2014 Jkt 049200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\HC121.RDS HC121

emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

HCON 121 RDS 

1 tary personnel strengths for such fiscal year, and for other 

2 purposes.’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives December 4, 

2014. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 10.6

          Confidential Materials omitted and filed separately with the
         Securities and Exchange Commission. Asterisks denote omissions.

                                    AGREEMENT

1.   BioSphere Medical Inc. [and its subsidiary to be Biosphere Medical KK]
     [BMKK] will initially focus on the approval and the marketing of
     SAP-microsphere, until SAP-MS is approved, unless we have a common
     agreement to work also on Embosphere.

2.   BioSphere Medical, Inc. will pay for Japanese regulatory approval of SAP-MS
     [including consultant, toxicity studies, etc.] up to [**].-

3.   Shinichi Hori licenses exclusively its rights to SAP-MS, including patent
     JP 6056676, to BioSphere Medical, per attached agreement.

4.   Biosphere Medical will continue to work actively with Shinichi Hori, Rinku
     Medical Center and Osaka University and leading groups in Europe and the
     USA to coordinate development an evaluation of embolotherapy technology,
     including gels.

5.   Shinichi Hori joins BioSphere Medical Advisory Board as International
     Representative, according to the attached agreement. Through that
     agreement, BioSphere Medical will support animal work related to
     microsphere technology at Osaka University with a designated Research
     Grant, and will support mutually agreed travel expenses from Shinichi Hori
     to promote microsphere technology.





     /s/ Jean-Marie Vogel                                     /s/ Shinichi Hori

<PAGE>


          Confidential Materials omitted and filed separately with the
         Securities and Exchange Commission. Asterisks denote omissions.

                 LICENSE OF SAP-MS RIGHTS, INCLUDING JP 6056676

In addition to financial support and technical collaboration for Japanese
approval of SAP-MS for embolization, and in addition to any consulting fees and
expense reimbursement, BioSphere Medical Inc. will pay directly Shinichi Hori
following for exclusive license of SAP-MS rights:

1/ Royalties of [**] on [**] sales, [**] on [**] sales

2/ Upfront prepaid payment of royalties based on [**] of [**] for [**] [based on
[**] in [**], and a [**] representing [**] of [**]]

[**] of [**]:
est. 24,000

From which, [**]:
est. [**]

[**] [[**] per [**], [**] per [**]]:
[**]

[**]:
[**]

[**] Royalty:
[**] or [**].-

/s/ Jean-Marie Vogel                                     /s/ Shinichi Hori
```
 
 
VIX FUTURES - CBOE FUTURES EXCHANGE                                  Code-1170E1
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 04/15/14                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
($1000 X INDEX)                                      OPEN INTEREST:      368,887
COMMITMENTS
  96,296  132,242   87,262  162,952  122,146  346,510  341,650   22,377   27,237

CHANGES FROM 04/08/14 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:      8,935)
  -8,800   -4,600   -2,820   18,906   15,935    7,286    8,515    1,649      420

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    26.1     35.8     23.7     44.2     33.1     93.9     92.6      6.1      7.4

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      183)
      56       72       72       39       37      138      149
```

----

Updated April 18, 2014