(“Reasonable suspicion is based on the totality of the circumstances, which requires a reviewing court to examine relevant factors as a collective whole rather than independent pieces.”); United States v. Staples, 194 F.Supp.2d 582, 585 (W.D.Tex.2002) (“[T]he recent opinion in Arvizu emphasized that a court may not evaluate the factors in isolation of each other. Rather, the ‘totality of the circumstances’ approach requires the court to consider the officer’s observations and inferences as a comprehensive picture of the situation that, as a whole, may or may not justify reasonable suspicion.”). “No single fact is determinative” of the outcome of a reasonable suspicion analysis. United States v. Guerrero-Barajas, 240 F.3d 428, 433 (5th Cir.2001); Arvizu, 534 U.S. at 266,122 S.Ct. 744 (<HOLDING>); Staples, 194 F.Supp.2d at 585 (“[A] court may
holding that it is improper to categorize certain factors  as simply out of bounds in deciding whether there was reasonable suspicion for the stop holding that circumstances created reasonable suspicion for investigatory stop holding this framework applies whether the traffic stop is based on probable cause or reasonable suspicion recognizing that a district attorney must have reasonable latitude in fairly presenting a case to the jury and that the trial judge must have reasonable discretion in deciding whether the bounds of propriety have been exceeded holding that an officer has reasonable suspicion to conduct traffic stop even when his suspicion that a law has been violated is based on a reasonable mistake of law