alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32.1
                                  ------------


                      Statement of Chief Executive Officer
         Pursuant to Section 1350 of Title 18 of the United States Code


Pursuant to Section 1350 of Title 18 of the United States Code, the undersigned,
Denis A. Krusos, the Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of
CopyTele, Inc., hereby certifies that:

     1.   The Company's Form 10-Q Quarterly Report for the period ended July 31,
          2006 (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 operations
          of the Company.


                                                       /s/ Denis A. Krusos
                                                       -------------------------
                                                       Denis A. Krusos
                                                       Chairman of the Board and
September 11, 2006                                     Chief Executive Officer
# L_2009309EN.01008701.xml

| 24.11.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 309/87 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.11.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 309/87

---

Corrigendum to Regulation (EC) No 593/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 on the law applicable to contractual obligations (Rome I)

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 177 of 4 July 2008
  )

On page 16, Article 28, ‘Application in time’:

for:

‘This Regulation shall apply to contracts concluded after 17 December 2009.’,

read:

‘This Regulation shall apply to contracts concluded as from 17 December 2009.’.

---
USDC IN/ND case 2:16-cv-00246-JD-JEM   document 15   filed 02/24/17   page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1995
<CASH>                                          34,254
<SECURITIES>                                    41,838
<RECEIVABLES>                                  224,165
<ALLOWANCES>                                     5,613
<INVENTORY>                                    892,092
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,226,300
<PP&E>                                         213,236
<DEPRECIATION>                                  72,657
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,766,095
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          780,707
<BONDS>                                        467,633
<COMMON>                                       120,836
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          183,534
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                     157,389
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   278,225
<SALES>                                      2,598,721
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,598,721
<CGS>                                        2,468,127
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,468,127
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,309
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              15,458
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 17,867
<INCOME-TAX>                                       357
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             15,639
<DISCONTINUED>                                 (1,317)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    14,322
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.22
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.22
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit10.31 2014.12.31






Exhibit 10.31




Amendment No. 1 to CONTRACT MANUFACTURER AGREEMENT


This Amendment No. 1 is made by and A10 NETWORKS, INC. (“A10 Networks”) a Delaware corporation, with principal offices located at 3 West Plumeria Drive, San Jose, California 95134 U.S.A. (“A10 Networks”) and, AEWIN Technologies, Inc. (“AEWIN”), with offices at 9FL, No. 133, Sec. 2, Ta-Tung Road , Hsi-Chi City., Taipei Hsien, Taiwan, R.O.C., with respect to the Contract Manufacturer Agreement between the parties having an Effective Date of July 1, 2008 as renewed by that certain letter dated July 1, 2011 (collectively, the “Agreement”).       


A10 Networks and AEWIN are sometimes individually referred to herein as a “party” or collectively referred to herein as the “parties.”  Capitalized terms used in this Amendment No. 1 shall have the same meaning ascribed to them in the Agreement. 


For good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereby amend the Agreement as follows:


		
	(1)
	EXTENSION OF TERM


Section 4.1 (“Term”), shall be deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following : 
“4.1 Term. The term of this Agreement shall be for an initial period of six (6) years, commencing on the Effective Date. Thereafter, this Agreement shall automatically renew for subsequent one (1) year terms, unless either party notifies the other party in writing of non-renewal at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of the then-current term.”


This Amendment No. 1 supersedes all prior discussions and understandings between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof.  In the event of a conflict between the terms of this Amendment No. 1 and the original Agreement, the terms of this Amendment No. 1 shall prevail.  Except as expressly modified and amended in this Amendment No. 1, all other provisions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect and unchanged, and are ratified hereby. 
 
The effective date of this Amendment No. 1 is June 30, 2014 (“First Amendment Date”). 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the authorized representatives of the parties hereto have signed this Amendment No. 1 as of the First Amendment Date set forth above.


 
	
		
	AEWIN:
	A10 Networks:

	AEWIN TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
	A10 NETWORKS, INC.

	By:  
	By:  

	Name:  Alec Ku  
	Name:  Robert Cochran

	Title:  Chief Financial Officer
	Title:  Vice President, Legal and Corporate Collaboration 

	Date:   June 30, 2014
	Date:   June 30, 2014
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-40071

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

MODESTO SALVADOR HERNANDEZ,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 7:10-CR-1426-1

Before BENAVIDES, DENNIS, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Modesto Salvador

Hernandez has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance

with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632

F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Hernandez has not filed a response. We have reviewed

counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We

concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue

for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

October 21, 2011

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

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.

Case: 11-40071 Document: 00511640961 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/21/2011
No. 11-40071

GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the

APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

2

Case: 11-40071 Document: 00511640961 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/21/2011
EXHIBIT 10.10


 


Summary of Independent Bank Corporation



Management Incentive Compensation Plan


 


This document summarizes the Management
Incentive Compensation Plan (the “Plan”) of Independent Bank Corporation, a Michigan corporation (the “Company”).
The Plan covers all management employees, including the Company's Named Executives.


 


The Plan provides for annual cash incentives
to Plan participants based on the extent to which Company and individual performance objectives are met or exceeded. The Plan has
three annual performance levels: (1) threshold represents the performance level that must be achieved before any incentive awards
are payable; (2) target performance is defined as a desired level of performance in view of all relevant factors; and (3) the maximum
represents that which reflects outstanding performance. Target performance under the Plan is intended to provide for aggregate
annual cash compensation (salary and bonus) that approximates peer level compensation. Threshold performance would result in earning
50% of the target incentive, target would be 100%, and maximum would be 200%, with compensation prorated between these award levels.


 


The target bonus levels generally range
from 10% of base salary (for lower level Plan participants), up to 50% of base salary for the Company's Chief Executive Officer.
Plan participants are generally eligible to receive incentive compensation based on the achievement of certain Company performance
objectives (weighted at 60% to 80%) as well as predetermined individual goals (weighted at 20% to 40%).


 


The Company performance objectives are
established by the Compensation Committee and approved by the Board each year and may include (but are not necessarily limited
to) goals related to earnings per share, non-performing assets to total assets, organic deposit growth, and the Bank's efficiency
ratio. The performance objectives for a particular year are generally established during the first quarter of such year, and any
bonuses payable as a result of the achievement of such objectives are generally paid in the first quarter of the following fiscal
year. Amounts earned under the Plan are payable in full following finalization of the Company's financial results for the performance
period. In addition, the Board may condition the payment of any bonuses under the Plan by the achievement of any one or more of
the performance objectives.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 490 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 490

To amend title 38, United States Code, to increase the maximum age for 
 children eligible for medical care under the CHAMPVA program, and for 
                            other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 3, 2011

   Mr. Akaka introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
             referred to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title 38, United States Code, to increase the maximum age for 
 children eligible for medical care under the CHAMPVA program, and for 
                            other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. INCREASE OF MAXIMUM AGE FOR CHILDREN ELIGIBLE FOR MEDICAL 
              CARE UNDER CHAMPVA PROGRAM.

    (a) Increase.--Subsection (c) of section 1781 of title 38, United 
States Code, is amended to read as follows:
    ``(c)(1) Notwithstanding clauses (i) and (iii) of section 101(4)(A) 
of this title and except as provided in paragraph (2), for purposes of 
this section, a child who is eligible for benefits under subsection (a) 
shall remain eligible for benefits under this section until the child's 
26th birthday, regardless of the child's marital status.
    ``(2) Before January 1, 2014, paragraph (1) shall not apply to a 
child who is eligible to enroll in an eligible employer-sponsored plan 
(as defined in section 5000A(f)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 
1986).
    ``(3) This subsection shall not be construed to limit eligibility 
for coverage of a child described in section 101(4)(A)(ii) of this 
title.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--Such subsection, as so amended, shall apply 
with respect to medical care provided on or after the date of the 
enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2276 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2276

                To suspend temporarily the duty on TSME.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 11, 2005

 Mr. English of Pennsylvania introduced the following bill; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
                To suspend temporarily the duty on TSME.

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

SECTION 1. TSME.

    (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:

``      9902.09.08      Ortho/Para          Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         Toluenesulfonic                                                    31/2008
                         Acid Methyl Ester
                         (TSME) (CAS Nos.
                         23373-38-8 and 80-
                         48-8) (provided
                         for in subheading
                         2904.10.37)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
I 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2141

To suspend temporarily the duty on 1-Propanone, 2-methyl-1-[4- 

(methylthio)phenyl]-2-(4- morpholinyl)–(9cl). 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 5, 2005

Mr. BERRY introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Ways and Means 

A BILL

To suspend temporarily the duty on 1-Propanone, 2-methyl1-[4- (methylthio)phenyl]-2-(4- morpholinyl)–(9cl).

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. 1-PROPANONE, 2-METHYL-1-[4- 

4 (METHYLTHIO)PHENYL]-2-(4- MORPHOLINYL)–

5 9(CL). 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

7 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

8 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

9 new heading:
2

•HR 2141 IH 

‘‘ 9902.05.53 1-Propanone, 2-methyl-1-[4- 

(methylthio)phenyl]-2-(4- 

morpholinyl)–9(cl) (CAS No. 

718–10–5) (provided for in 

subheading 2934.99.39) ...... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2008 ’’. 

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from 

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after 

4 the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
#### William H. Alden et al., Appellants, v. William P. Earle, Respondent.

(Argued May 9, 1890;

decided June 3, 1890.)

Appeal from order of the General Term of the Superior' Court of the city of New York, made January 7,1889, which reversed a judgment in favor of plaintiffs entered upon a. verdict directed by the court, and *granted*a new *trial.*

This action was brought by plaintiffs, real estate brokers, to. recover commissions for renting certain premises belonging to-defendant. After discussing the evidence, the court here say r

“We think the facts bring the case within the rule declared in *Sibbald*v. *Bethlehem Iron Co.*(83 N. Y. 381). There is. no pretence of bad faith on the part of the defendant. The negotiations conducted by the plaintiffs may have contributed and undoubtedly did contribute to render more easy the agreement finally reached. But the compensation of the plaintiffs was contingent upon their effecting the leasing of the premises to Merwin, Hulbert & Co. It cannot be said as matter of law at least, that they performed this condition.

*689“ The order granting a new trial should, therefore, be affirmed and judgment absolute rendered for the defendant on the stipulation, with costs.”

*John K. Cravey*for appellants.

*Hamilton Odell*for respondent.

Andrews, J.,

reads for affirmance of order and for judgment absolute on stipulation against plaintiffs.

All concur.

Order affirmed and judgment accordingly.
Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Atlantic and

Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the Court of any formal errors

so that corrections may be made before the bound volumes go to press.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS

No. 15-BG-8

IN RE: KENRICK A. SMALL,

Respondent.

Bar Registration No. 502463 BDN: 312-14

BEFORE: Beckwith, Associate Judge, and King and Reid, Senior Judges. 

ORDER

(FILED - April 30, 2015)

On consideration ofthe certified order suspending respondent fromthe practice

of law in the state of Massachusetts for a period of six months, this court’s January

29, 2015, order suspending respondent pending further action of the court and

directing him to show cause why reciprocal discipline should not be imposed, and the

statement of Bar Counsel regarding reciprocal discipline, and it appearing that

respondent has failed to file a response to this court’s order to show cause but did file

the affidavit as required by D.C. Bar R. XI, §14 (g) on February 27, 2015, it is 

ORDERED that Kenrick A. Small is hereby suspended from the practice of

law in the District of Columbia for a period six months, nunc pro tunc to February 27,

2015. See In re Sibley, 990 A.2d 483 (D.C. 2010), and In re Fuller, 930 A.2d 194,

198 (D.C. 2007) (rebuttable presumption of identical reciprocal discipline applies to

all cases in which the respondent does not participate).

PER CURIAM
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 435 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 435

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase the exclusion 
            for employer-provided dependent care assistance.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 2, 2011

Mr. Burr (for himself, Mr. Johanns, and Mrs. Gillibrand) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                                Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase the exclusion 
            for employer-provided dependent care assistance.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Child and Dependent Care FSA 
Enhancement Act''.

SEC. 2. INCREASE IN EXCLUSION FOR EMPLOYER-PROVIDED DEPENDENT CARE 
              ASSISTANCE.

    (a) In General.--Subparagraph (A) of section 129(a)(2) of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to dependent care assistance 
programs) is amended by striking ``$5,000 ($2,500'' and inserting 
``$7,500 (half such dollar amount''.
    (b) Inflation Adjustment.--Paragraph (2) of section 129(a) of such 
Code is amended by redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (D) 
and by inserting after subparagraph (B) the following new subparagraph:
                    ``(C) Inflation adjustment.--In the case of any 
                taxable year beginning in a calendar year after 2011, 
                the $7,500 amount in subparagraph (A) shall be 
                increased by an amount equal to--
                            ``(i) such dollar amount, multiplied by
                            ``(ii) the cost-of-living adjustment 
                        determined under section 1(f)(3) for the 
                        calendar year in which the taxable year begins, 
                        determined by substituting `calendar year 2010' 
                        for `calendar year 1992' in subparagraph (B) 
                        thereof.
                Any increase determined under the preceding sentence 
                shall be rounded to the nearest multiple of $100.''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2010.
                                 <all>
```
#### THEEL, Respondent, v. PETERS, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

February 6, 1898.)

Action by Christ Theel against John Peters.

No opinion. Order affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.