alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 4.15


 


SIXTH
AMENDMENT TO THE FIRST RESTATEMENT OF THE


MERIT
MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC.


401(k)
PROFIT SHARING PLAN


 


This Sixth Amendment to the First Restatement
of the Merit Medical Systems, 401(k) Profit Sharing Plan (the “Plan”) is made
and adopted effective as of March 28, 2005, to read as follows:


 


WHEREAS, Merit Medical Systems, Inc.
(the “Company”) maintains the Plan for the benefit of its employees and the
employees of its participating subsidiaries; and


 


WHEREAS, the Company desires to amend the Plan
in certain respects;


 


NOW, THEREFORE, the Company hereby amends the
Plan as follows effective March 28, 2005:


 


1.                                       Article VI,
Section F, of the Plan is amended to add the following sentence at the end
thereof:


 


“Any provision
herein to the contrary notwithstanding, in the event of a mandatory distribution
greater than $1,000 and less than $5,001, to which the Participant consent
requirements of Section VI C4 do not apply, if the Participant does not
elect to have such distribution paid directly to an Eligible Retirement Plan
specified by the Participant in a direct rollover or to receive the
distribution directly, then distribution shall be made in a direct rollover to
an individual retirement plan designated by the Plan Administrator.”


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused
this amendment to be executed by its duly authorized officer this 8th
day of October, 2005.


 


	
   

  	
  MERIT MEDICAL SYSTEMS, INC.

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  By:

  	
  /s/

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  Name:

  
	
   

  	
  Title:
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED

PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In
connection with the filing of Amendment No. 2 to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB/A for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2006 (the
Report) by CapSource Financial, Inc. (Registrant), I, Fred C. Boethling, certify, pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of my knowledge:



1.
        The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and




2.
        The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Registrant.




DATE:   July 25, 2007
        
        By:
        /s/ Fred C. BoethlingName:   Fred C. BoethlingChief Executive Officer












---
Tryx Ventures Corporation - Exhibit 10.17






KAHNAWAKE GAMING COMMISSION

TEMPORARY CLIENT PROVIDER
AUTHORIZATION

	Issued to: 	TRYX VENTURES CORPORATION 
	Address: 	Suite 314 – 857 West Hastings Street,
      Vancouver, BC V6B 2V2 
	Telephone: 	604.602.9596 
	Fax: 	604.844.7572 
	E-mail: 	info@mobilegamingnow.com 
	Address of 	  
	Certified Premises: 	Suite 1505 – 409 Granville Street, Vancouver,
      BC V6B 2V2 
	Authorized Games: 	Interactive games of chance or mixed chance and
      skill 
	Commencement date: 	8, Seskehkowa/September, 2005 
	Termination date: 	31, Keutenha/October 2005 


The Interactive Gaming License to which this Temporary Client
Provider Authorization is to be appended is held by Mohawk Internet
Technologies.

Issued within the Mohawk Territory of Kahnawake, 2005. 

	 	signed
    	 
	 	Commissioner 	 
	 	 	 
	 	signed
    	 
	 	Commissioner 	 


In accordance with section 33(f) and (g) of the Kahnawake
  Gaming Regulations the Kahnawake Gaming Commission and the members, employees
  and agents are not liable for any damages, losses, costs or liabilities incurred
  by the holder of this Temporary Client Provider Authorization. Moreover, the
  holder of this Temporary Client Provider Authorization has agreed to indemnify
  the Kahnawake Gaming Commission against any claims, demands or actions and any
  resulting damages, awards or costs (including legal costs) brought by any third
  party against the Commission in relation to acts or omissions of the holder
  of this Temporary Client Provider Authorization.
Exhibit
32.1





Certification
of Principal Executive Officer


Pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002




In
connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended October
31, 2008 (the “Report”) of AirSharesTM EU Carbon Allowances Fund (the
“Registrant”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof, I, Joseph L. Schocken, the Chief Executive Officer of XShares Advisors
LLC, Sponsor of the Registrant, hereby certify, to the best of my knowledge,
that:




(1) The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and




(2) The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the
Registrant.




Date:  December 22, 2008
                By:
                /s/ Joseph L.
      SchockenName:
                Joseph
      L. SchockenTitle:
                Chief
      Executive Officer
                  XShares
      Advisors LLC,
                  Sponsor
      of AirSharesTM EU Carbon Allowances
Fund
| **--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------** |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| DOCUMENT: | **CL** | **1** |
|-----------|--------|-------|

|  | **New York          Mercantile Exchange (NYME)** |
|--|---------------------------------------------------|

| DATE: | 04/07/2004 | FR          page: | N/A | pageS: | 6 | PDF          SIZE: | 191          KB | PDF          LINK: | /files/foia/c |
|-------|------------|--------------------|-----|--------|---|---------------------|------------------|---------------------|---------------|

|  | **--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------** |
|--|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

FirstPreviousNextLast
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C.SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Scott Longval, Chief Financial Officer (principal
financial officer) of IntriCon Corporation (the Company), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:



| | 1) | the quarterly report on
Form 10-Q of the Company for the nine months ended September 30, 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.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Date:   November 9, 2006

| |  | /s/ | Scott Longval                                                                  
| |  | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |  |     | Scott LongvalChief Financial Officer and Treasurer(principal financial officer)



The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code) and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.

---
Presidential Documents

30285

Federal Register

Vol. 66, No. 108

Tuesday, June 5, 2001

Title 3—

The President

Executive Order 13215 of May 31, 2001

President’s Information Technology Advisory Committee,

Further Amendment to Executive Order 13035, as Amended

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the

laws of the United States of America, including the High-Performance Computing Act of 1991 (Public Law 102–194), as amended by the Next Generation

Internet Research Act of 1998 (Public Law 105–305), and in order to extend

the life of the President’s Information Technology Advisory Committee so

that it may continue to carry out its responsibilities, it is hereby ordered

that Executive Order 13035 of February 11, 1997, as amended by Executive

Orders 13092, 13113, and 13200 (Executive Order 13035, as amended),

is further amended as follows:

Section 1. Section 1 of Executive Order 13035, as amended, is further

amended by deleting the last sentence and inserting in lieu thereof: ‘‘Members

appointed prior to June 1, 2001, shall serve until December 1, 2001, unless

reappointed by the President. Members appointed or reappointed on or

after June 1, 2001, shall serve for no more than 2 years from the date

of their appointment, unless their period of service is extended by the

President. The President shall designate two co-chairs from among the members of the Committee. A co-chair may serve for a term of 2 years or

until the end of his or her service as a member of the Committee, whichever

is the shorter period.’’

Sec. 2. Section 4(b) of Executive Order 13035, as amended, is further amended

by deleting ‘‘June 1, 2001,’’ and inserting in lieu thereof: ‘‘June 1, 2003.’’

[FR Doc. 01–14319

Filed 6–4–01; 8:45 am]

THE WHITE HOUSE,

May 31, 2001.

W

Billing code 3195–01–P
Exhibit
32.1





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906


OF
THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





The undersigned, James Cates, the Chief
Executive Officer of MIKOJO INCORPORATED (the “Company”), DOES HEREBY CERTIFY
that:





1.  The Company's Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009 (the “Report”),
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934; and





2.  Information contained in
the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
and results of operation of the Company.





IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the
undersigned has executed this statement this 16th day of November,
2009.





/s/
      James CatesJames
      CatesChief
      Executive Officer





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
MIKOJO INCORPORATED and will be retained by MIKOJO INCORPORATED and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
#### Adrian JOHNSON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Jon OZMINT, Director; Warden of Perry Correctional Institution, Respondents-Appellees.

No. 10-6666.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Oct. 19, 2010.

Decided: Oct. 27, 2010.

*815Adrian Johnson, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Alphonso Simon, Jr., Office of the Attorney General of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Before DUNCAN, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Adrian Johnson seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. The order is not appeal-able unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). A certificate of ap-pealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *see Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. *Slack,*529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Johnson has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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.

*DISMISSED.*
CONFIDENTIAL
MATERIALS OMITTED AND FILED SEPARATELY WITH

    THE
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION. ASTERISKS DENOTE OMISSIONS.

     

    EXHIBIT
10.24

     

    PAYMENT
DATE EXTENSION AMENDMENT

     

    Ikaria
Development Subsidiary One LLC, a Delaware limited liability company having a
principal place of business at 6 State Route 173, Clinton, NJ 08809, USA (“Ikaria”), BioLineRx
Ltd., a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Israel
and having a principal place of business at 19 Hartum Street, P.O. Box 45158,
Jerusalem 91450, Israel (“BioLineRx Ltd.”), and
BioLine Innovations Jerusalem L.P., a limited partnership organized and existing
under the laws of the State of Israel and having a principal place of business
at 19 Hartum Street, P.O. Box 45158, Jerusalem 91450, Israel (“BioLine
Innovations”; together with BioLineRx Ltd., “BioLineRx”) are party
to an Amended and Restated License and Commercialization Agreement dated as of
the 26th day of August, 2009 (the “Agreement”). Any
defined terms used herein shall have them meaning ascribed thereto in the
Agreement.

     

    Pursuant
to Section
4.1(a) the Agreement, Ikaria is required to make a milestone payment to
BioLineRx of USD $10,000,000 upon the Successful Completion of the On-Going
Phase I/II Trial (the “Second Milestone
Payment”) on or before [***]. BioLine and Ikaria are currently in
discussions to determine whether Ikaria is required to withhold United States
federal income taxes from the Second Milestone Payment. In order to enable the
parties to complete those discussions, Ikaria and BioLine hereby agree that the
due date for the Second Milestone Payment is hereby extended to
[***].

     

    Sections
10.2 (“Governing Law”)
and 10.3 (“Submission to
Jurisdiction”) of the Agreement are hereby incorporated herein by
reference.

     

    Acknowledged,
Agreed, and Confirmed

    
      
        	 	 	 	 	 
	
                
                  /s/ Daniel
    Tassé

                

              	 	 	
                
                  /s/ Kinneret Savitsky

                

              	 
	
                
                  Daniel
      Tassé

                

              	 	 	
                
                  Kinneret
      Savitsky,

                

              	 
	
                
                  Chief
      Executive Officer


                    Ikaria
      Development Subsidiary One LLC

                  

                

              	 	 	
                
                  Chief
      Executive Officer


                    On
      behalf of, and as authorized representative of, both BioLineRx Ltd. and
      BioLine Innovations Jerusalem L.P.

                  

                

              	 


      

    

     

    
      [***]
Omitted pursuant to a confidential treatment request. The confidential portion
has been filed separately with the SEC.
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-11095 Conference Calendar

RICKY JOE PETTIT, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus RANDALL COUNTY, TEXAS, Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:96-CV-12

- - - - - - - - - - February 20, 1997 Before SMITH, EMILIO M. GARZA, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Ricky Joe Pettit has filed a brief which restates the factual allegations in his original complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The merits of his complaint were never addressed because the district court ordered Pettit to supplement his complaint with further factual information and Pettit failed to comply with the order. The district court dismissed the complaint for failure to prosecute.No. 96-11095 - 2 - Pettit fails to argue in his appeal brief any error on the part of the district court, e.g., that the district court erred in dismissing his complaint for want of prosecution. Pettit has presented nothing for this court to review. His appeal is frivolous and is therefore DISMISSED. See Grant v. Cuellar , 59 F.3d 523, 524-25 (5th Cir. 1995); 5th Cir. R. 42.2.
APPEAL DISMISSED.
#### EMMERT SECOND LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, I.A.M. of Puerto Rico, Inc., and Dura-Stilt Sales Limited Partnership, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. MARSHALLTOWN COMPANY, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 2011-1532.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

Jan. 13, 2012.

Before NEWMAN, LINN, and REYNA, Circuit Judges.

LINN, Circuit Judge.

ORDER

Emmert Second Limited Partnership, et al. (Emmert) move to dismiss this appeal *932as premature. Marshalltown Company (Marshalltown) opposes. Emmert replies.

Emmert filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma against Marshall-town, alleging patent infringement. Marshall-town filed a counterclaim of false patent marking. On Emmert’s motion, the district court dismissed Marshall-town’s counterclaim for failure to state a claim pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). Marshalltown appealed.

Emmert contends that because its claims against Marshalltown are still pending before the district court, the appeal is premature. Marshalltown argues that it may appeal because the district court, by dismissing Marshalltown’s counterclaim, effectively denied an injunction. Emmert replies that Marshalltown did not specifically seek injunctive relief in its complaint and that in any event Marshalltown has made no showing that the district court’s dismissal order might have some “serious, perhaps irreparable, consequence” and could only be “effectually challenged” by immediate appeal. *Carson v. Am. Brands, Inc.,*450 U.S. 79, 84, 101 S.Ct. 993, 67 L.Ed.2d 59 (1981) (“a litigant must show more than that the order has the practical effect of refusing an injunction.... Unless a litigant can show that an interlocutory order of the district court might have a ‘serious, perhaps irreparable, consequence,’ and that the order can be ‘effectually challenged’ only by immediate appeal, the general congressional policy against piecemeal review will preclude interlocutory appeal.”).

We agree with Emmert that the appeal is premature and that Marshalltown has made no showing that it may appeal under *Carson.*Because there are pending claims, there is no final judgment and this appeal is premature. *See Nystrom v. TREX Co.,*339 F.3d 1347, 1350 (Fed.Cir.2003) (“If a case is not fully adjudicated as to all claims for all parties and there is no express determination that there is no just reason for delay or express direction for entry of judgment as to fewer than all of the parties or claims, there is no final decision ... and therefore no jurisdiction”).

Accordingly,

It Is ORDERED That:

(1) Emmert’s motion to dismiss is granted.

(2) All pending motions are denied as moot.
UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C.20549



---

Form 8-K

---



CURRENT REPORT

Pursuant to Section13 OR 15(d)of The Securities Exchange Act of 1934



Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported):September 16, 2008



---

MTS SYSTEMS CORPORATION

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)



Minnesota

        

        0-2382

        

        41-0908057(State or other jurisdictionof incorporation)

        

        (CommissionFile Number)

        

        (IRS EmployerIdentification No.)14000 Technology DriveEden Prairie, Minnesota

        

        

        

        55344(Address of principalexecutive offices)

        

        

        

        (Zip Code)




Registrants telephone number, including area code:(952) 937-4000



N/A

(Former name or former address, if changed since last report.)



---

Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions:



oWritten communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)



oSoliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12)



oPre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b))



oPre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c))







---

Item 5.02.Departure of Directors or Certain Officers; Election of Directors; Appointment of Certain Officers; Compensatory Arrangements of Certain Officers.



(d)

        Election of Director.  Effective November 24, 2008, the Board of Directors of MTS Systems Corporation (the Company) elected Joe ODonnell to serve as a director of the Company.  Mr. ODonnell is currently Chief Executive Officer of Inmar, Inc., a provider of technology-driven logistics and supply chain software solutions to retailers, wholesalers and manufacturers in the consumer goods and healthcare markets.  Previously, Mr. ODonnell was Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Artesyn Technolgies, Inc., which designs, manufactures
and sells electronic subsystems.  Mr. ODonnell has not been named to serve on any committees of the Board of Directors.




Departure of Director.  On September 16, 2008, Ricardo Artigas resigned from the Board of Directors of the Company.  Mr. Artigas also resigned as a member of the Audit Committee and the Governance and Nominating Committee of the Board of Directors.  Mr. Artigas resigned in connection with a change in his employment, and not as a result of any disagreements with the Company on any matter relating to the Companys operations, policies or practices.



---

SIGNATURES



Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.



MTS SYSTEMS CORPORATION(Registrant)Date: September 22, 2008

        By:

        /s/ SUSAN E. KNIGHTSusan E. KnightVice President and Chief Financial Officer


---