alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 32.01




CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I, Tom Hofer certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of
Vendalux Corporation on Form 10-KSB for the Annual period ended March 31, 2005
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Form
10-KSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and
results of operations of Vendalux Corporation.

By: /s/
   ------------------------------
Name: Tom Hofer
Title:   Chief Executive Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to the registrant and will be
retained by the registrant and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

September 9, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

136408 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, 

Justices 

v SC: 136408 

 COA: 277104 

Wayne CC: 06-013886-01

JERMAINE MANUEL MURPHY, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 15, 2008 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

s0828 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

September 9, 2008 

 Clerk
STATE of North Carolina v. Jerry Lynn STUART, Jr.

No. 472P07.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

August 26, 2008.

Kathryn L. VandenBerg, Raleigh, for Stuart.

William B. Crumpler, Assistant Attorney General, Robert F. Johnson, District Attorney, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 24th day of September 2007 by Defendant in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 26th day of August 2008."
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA DA 19-0557
STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiffand Appellee,
v. RAYMOND CLARK SMITH,JR.,

Defendant and Appellant. 

# FILE5 OCT 1 3 2020 Bovven Clerk of State of ORDER

Counsel for the Appellant Raymond Clark Smith,Jr., filed a motion and briefasking to be allowed to withdraw from this appeal on grounds that counsel has been unable to find any nonfrivolous issues to raise on appeal,pursuant to § 46-8-103(2), MCA, and Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738,87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967). Smith was granted time to file a response, but no response was filed. The Court has now independently examined the record pursuant to § 46-8-103(2), MCA,and Anders. We conclude there are no arguments with potential legal merit that could be raised in a direct appeal ofSmith's conviction in this case. Therefore, IT IS ORDERED that this appeal is DISMISSED. The Clerk is directed to provide copies ofthis Order to all counsel ofrecord and to Smith personally. DATED this 

## 3 day ofOctober, 2020.

ChiefJustice 10/13/2020

Case Number: DA 19-0557(9 : 4 A 4 2A

1 1--_
; L e e Justices
# C_2012133EN.01002102.xml

| 5.5.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 133/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.5.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 133/21

---

Judgment of the General Court of 21 March 2012 — Marine Harvest Norway and Alsaker Fjordbruk v Council

(Case T-113/06) (1)

1

(Dumping - Imports of salmon originating in Norway - Definition of the Community industry - Like product - Composition of the sample of Community producers)

2012/C 133/40

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicants: Marine Harvest Norway AS, successor in law to Fjord Seafood Norway AS (Bergen, Norway) and Alsaker Fjordbruk AS (Onarheim, Norway) (represented by: J.M. Juuhl-Langseth and P. Dyrberg, lawyers)

Applicants:

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: J.-P. Hix and B. Driessen, acting as Agents, and by G. Berrisch, lawyer)

Defendant:

Intervener in support of the defendant: European Commission (represented: initially by P. Stancanelli and K. Talabér-Ritz, and subsequently by K. Talabér-Ritz, T. Scharf and H. van Vliet, acting as Agents, and by E. McGovern, Barrister)

Intervener in support of the defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of Council Regulation (EC) No 85/2006 of 17 January 2006 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of farmed salmon originating in Norway (OJ 2006 L 15, p. 1)

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls Council Regulation (EC) No 85/2006 of 17 January 2006 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of farmed salmon originating in Norway in so far as it concerns Marine Harvest Norway AS, legal successor to Fjord Seafood Norway AS, for the anti-dumping duties applied to imports originating from the latter until 18 September 2007, and Alsaker Fjordbruk AS; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls Council Regulation (EC) No 85/2006 of 17 January 2006 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of farmed salmon originating in Norway in so far as it concerns Marine Harvest Norway AS, legal successor to Fjord Seafood Norway AS, for the anti-dumping duties applied to imports originating from the latter until 18 September 2007, and Alsaker Fjordbruk AS;

| 2. | Dismisses the action as to the remainder; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Dismisses the action as to the remainder;

| 3. | Orders the Council of the European Union to bear its own costs and to pay those of Marine Harvest Norway, legal successor to Fjord Seafood Norway, and Alsaker Fjordbruk; |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Council of the European Union to bear its own costs and to pay those of Marine Harvest Norway, legal successor to Fjord Seafood Norway, and Alsaker Fjordbruk;

| 4. | Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 131, 3.6.2006.

1

---
State of North Carolina v. Seymour Marlon Wint

No. COA16-244

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: September 20, 2016

DISMISSED.
# C_2010100EN.01003602.xml

| 17.4.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 100/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.4.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 100/36

---

Judgment of the General Court of 3 March 2010 — Artegodan v Commission

(Case T-429/05) (1)

1

(Non-contractual liability - Medicinal products for human use - Decision requiring the withdrawal of marketing authorisations - Annulment of the decision by a judgment of the Court of First Instance - Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law conferring rights on individuals)

2010/C 100/55

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Artegodan GmbH (Lüchow, Germany) (represented by: U. Doepner, then A. Lensing-Kramer and subsequently by U. Reese and A. Sandrock, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Stromsky and M. Heller)

Defendant:

Intervening in support of the form of order sought by the defendant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: M. Lumma and U. Forsthoff, Agents)

Intervening in support of the form of order sought by the defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for compensation under Article 235 EC and the second paragraph of Article 288 EC for damage allegedly suffered by the applicant as a result of the adoption of Commission Decision C (2000) 453 of 9 March 2000 concerning the withdrawal of marketing authorisations for medicinal products for human use containing amfepramone

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action.

| 2. | Orders Artegodan GmhH to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Artegodan GmhH to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.

| 3. | Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 48, 25.2.2006.

1

---
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1



                       KITTY HAWK, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

                STATEMENT OF COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER SHARE



<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                             QUARTER ENDED JUNE 30,     SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30,
                                               1997          1996          1997           1996
                                            -----------  -----------     -----------   -----------
<S>                                         <C>          <C>           <C>            <C>
Primary net income (loss) per share (1):
Weighted average number of common shares
outstanding...............................   10,451,807    7,423,436      10,451,807     7,423,436
Common shares related to SAB No. 83 (2)...           --      544,274              --       544,274
                                            -----------  -----------     -----------   -----------
Weighted average common and common
equivalent shares outstanding.............   10,451,807    7,967,710      10,451,807     7,967,710
                                            ===========  ===========     ===========   ===========

Net income (loss).........................  $ 2,561,088  $(1,288,329)    $ 3,975,029   $(1,149,317)
                                            ===========  ===========     ===========   ===========
Net income (loss) per share...............  $      0.25  $     (0.16)    $      0.38   $     (0.14)
                                            ===========  ===========     ===========   ===========
Fully diluted net income (loss) per share: 
Weighted average number of common shares
outstanding                                  10,451,807    7,423,436      10,451,807     7,423,436
Common shares related to SAB No. 83 (2)...           --      544,274              --       544,274
                                            -----------  -----------     -----------   -----------
Weighted average common and common
equivalent shares outstanding.............   10,451,807    7,967,710      10,451,807     7,967,710
                                            ===========  ===========     ===========   ===========

Net income (loss).........................  $ 2,561,088  $(1,288,329)    $ 3,975,029   $(1,149,317)
                                            ===========  ===========     ===========   ===========

Net income (loss) per share...............  $      0.25  $     (0.16)    $      0.38   $     (0.14)
                                            ===========  ===========     ===========   ===========
</TABLE>

(1)  The Company reports primary net income per share as the effect of dilutive
     securities is less than 3%.

(2)  Stock options granted to executives within 12 months of the filing date
     of the Company's initial public offering have been included in this line
     item through the date of exercise.  See Note 1 of Notes to Consolidated
     Financial Statements.