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





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Annual Report of Bairnco Corporation (the Corporation) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Luke E. Fichthorn III, Chairman & Chief Executive Officer of the Corporation, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



1.

The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 result of operations of the Corporation.







/s/ Luke E. Fichthorn, III_

Luke E. Fichthorn, III

Chairman &

Chief Executive Officer



#
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 220 (Wednesday, November 16, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 69604]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-22669]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD


Appointments of Individuals to Serve as Members of Performance 
Review Boards

    5 U.S.C. 4314(c)(4) requires that the appointments of individuals 
to serve as members of performance review boards be published in the 
Federal Register. Therefore, in compliance with this requirement, 
notice is hereby given that the individuals whose names and position 
titles appear below have been appointed to serve as members of 
performance review boards in the National Labor Relations Board for the 
rating year beginning October 1, 2004 and ending September 30, 2005.

Name and Title

Richard L. Ahearn--Regional Director, Region 19
Frank V. Battle--Deputy Director of Administration
John F. Colwell--Chief Counsel to Board Member
Harold J. Datz--Chief Counsel to the Chairman
John H. Ferguson--Associate General Counsel, Enforcement Litigation
Terence Flynn--Chief Counsel to Board Member
Robert A. Giannasi--Chief Administrative Law Judge
Lester A. Heltzer--Executive Secretary
John E. Higgins--Deputy General Counsel
Peter B. Hoffman--Regional Director, Region 34
Gloria Joseph--Director of Administration
Barry J. Kearney--Associate General Counsel, Advice
David B. Parker--Deputy Executive Secretary
Gary W. Shinners--Chief Counsel to Board Member
Richard A. Siegel--Associate General Counsel, Operations-Management
Lafe E. Solomon--Director, Office of Representation Appeals
Peter D. Winkler--Chief Counsel to Board Member

    Dated: November 10, 2005.

    By Direction of the Board.
Lester A. Heltzer,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 05-22669 Filed 11-15-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7545-01-M
<PAGE>





                                                                   Exhibit 23.1

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Nos. 333-69733 and 333-75504) on Form S-8 of our report dated November 14,
2003, except for Note K, as to which the date is February 24, 2004, with respect
to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Delphax Technologies
Inc. included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K/A) for the year ended September
30, 2003.



                                                     /s/ Ernst & Young LLP
                                                     -----------------------
                                                           Ernst & Young LLP



Minneapolis, Minnesota
February 24, 2004
#### LAURA M. SANFORD ET VIR., PLAINTIFFS, v. CHARLES H. TOTTY COMPANY ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

Decided January 20, 1932.

Before Gummebe, Chief Justice, and Justices Trenohard and Lloyd.

For the rule, *Lum, Tamblyn & Colyer.*

*Contra, Smith & Kiernan.*

Pee Curiam.

In December, 1929, Laura M. Sanford, a woman thirty-mine years of age and one of the present plaintiffs, while walking on Mount Pleasant avenue, in the town of Hanover, Hew Jersey, was run down and injured by an automobile belonging to the defendant corporation. She brought the present suit to recover compensation for the injuries which she received, her husband joining with her and seeking compensation for the loss of her society and assistance and the medical expenses already incurred by him and hereafter to be incurred in the treatment of his wife. The jury awarded the wife $26,000 and her husband $4,000. The award to the husband is not attacked by the defendants. We are asked to make the present rule absolute as to Mrs. Sanford because the verdict in her favor is excessive.

It clearly appears from the testimony submitted by the plaintiffs that as a result of this accident Mrs. Sanford is a physical wreck and that she will remain so during the rest

*116But, the essence of a lien is the retention of possession, and a relinquishment of the possession 'would thus terminate the lien, in the absence of statute or the agreement of the parties to the contrary. *Lanterman*v. *Luby (Court of Errors and Appeals),*96 *N. J. L.*255. Moreover, for the present attorney to hold the evidence necessary to prove the client’s cause would seriously embarrass a fair trial.

In order to secure to the client his free choice of attorneys and the use of all his evidence both before and during the-trial, and to secure to the attorney full payment for his services to date, whether his agreement as to the present litigation was contingent or not and whether such litigation should end in the defeat of his present client or not, the following order will he entered:

(1) To substitute the new attorney desired by the client;

(2) For the present attorney to deliver to the client the necessary evidence in the cause, but on condition;

(3) That (a) the plaintiff’s lien under the statute shall not he affected, and (b) that the client shall give security to-be approved by the court for the payment of the present attorney’s general lien, if any, if and when same is found to-be due.

*117of her life. The jury evidently believed this testimony and based its verdict upon it. We consider that the jury was entirely justified in finding that the injuries to Mrs. Sanford were of the character indicated, and, this being so, we cannot .say that the verdict, although large, is so plainly excessive as to justify this court in setting it aside'on that ground.

The rule to show cause will be discharged.
#### GLOBAL INNOVATIONS, INC., a Maryland corporation; et al., Plaintiffs—Appellants, v. ALS SCAN, INC., a Maryland corporation; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 03-16625.

D.C. No. CV-03-01277-JSW.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 18, 2005.*

Decided Feb. 24, 2005.

*783Charles Carreon, Online Media Law, PLLC, Ashland, OR, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Eric Weaver, Esq., Albany, CA, Owen Seitel, Esq., Idell Berman Seitel & Rutchik, LLP, San Francisco, CA, for Defendant-Appellee.

Before THOMAS, PAEZ, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.

*

This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Global Innovations, Inc. (“Global”) appeals the district court’s dismissal of its action seeking declaratory relief that Global is not infringing on copyrighted adult entertainment images owned by ALS Scan, Inc. (“ALS”) and that, as an Internet Service Provider, Global is entitled to the safe harbor defense provided by the Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act, 17 U.S.C. § 512. We affirm the district court. Because the parties are familiar with the factual and procedural history of this case, we will not recount it here.

The exercise of jurisdiction under the Declaratory Judgment Act is committed to the sound discretion of the district court. *Huth v. Hartford Ins. Co. of the Midwest,*298 F.3d 800, 802 (9th Cir.2002). Thus, we review the district court’s decision not to exercise its discretion to entertain Global’s declaratory judgment action for abuse of discretion. *Id.*at 803.

The district court refused to exercise its discretion for the following reasons: (1) it was clear from both parties’ submissions that ALS intended to sue Global in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, that Global knew of the impending lawsuit and that, in an obvious effort to rush the courthouse, filed the declaratory action in the Northern District of California; (2) none of the parties reside in California; (3) none of the events giving rise to the dispute occurred in California; (4) Global failed to establish that the court could exercise personal jurisdiction over the defendants; and (5) Maryland has a far greater interest in the resolution of the dispute and is a more convenient forum. The district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to exercise its discretion to hear Global’s declaratory relief action for the aforementioned reasons. Given this determination, we need not address any other issues raised by the parties.

AFFIRMED

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
Case 1:07-cr-00360-MHD Document 13 Filed 04/27/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cr-00360-MHD Document 13 Filed 04/27/2007 Page 2 of 2
#### MARTIN v. MARTIN

No. 112 PC.

Case below: 35 N.C. App. 610.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 6 June 1978.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-7495

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

WILLIAM CURBEAN,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Senior District 

Judge. (1:10-cr-00586-JFM-1; 1:12-cv-00364-JFM)

Submitted: March 28, 2013 Decided: April 1, 2013

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

William Curbean, Appellant Pro Se. Henry Brandis Marsh, Jr., 

Special Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, 

for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

William Curbean seeks to appeal the district court’s 

order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2012)

motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or 

judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. 

§ 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006). A certificate of appealability 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 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 

(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 motion states a 

debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 

529 U.S. at 484-85. 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude 

that Curbean has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, 

we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in 

forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral 

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 
3

presented in the materials before this court and argument would 

not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense POW/MIA Accounting AgencyFulfilling Our Nation's Promise

Search
Search

Search

              - 
              - 
              - 

-  Home		 
-  Families		 
-  Our Missing    -  Searchable List of the Missing             
  -  Searchable Map of the Missing             
  -  Recently Accounted For             
  -  World War II      -  World War II Summary             
    -  Battle of Tarawa             
    -  Attack on Pearl Harbor 
  -  Korean War      -  Korean War Summary             
    -  Battle of Chosin Reservoir             
    -  Battle of Unsan             
    -  Korean Air Battles             
    -  The Inchon Campaign             
    -  The Pusan Perimeter             
    -  The DMZ Campaigns             
    -  Korean War Disinterments             
    -  Operation Glory             
    -  POW Camps 
  -  Vietnam War      -  Vietnam War Summary             
    -  Vietnam War Identification Project             
    -  Tet Offensive             
    -  Battle of Khe Sanh             
    -  Mayaguez Incident             
    -  Battle of Ia Drang             
    -  Lam Son 
  -  Cold War             
  -  Gulf Wars & Libya             
  -  Unknowns 
-  News & Stories    -  Our Stories             
  -  Press Releases             
  -  DPAA In The News             
  -  Year In Review 
-  Multimedia    -  Livestreams             
  -  Podcast             
  -  Briefing Videos             
  -  Science Videos             
  -  DPAA Laboratory             
  -  Media Gallery 
-  Resources    -  FAQs             
  -  AFMES DNA Laboratory             
  -  Publicly Released Documents             
  -  Family/VSO Update Notes             
  -  Family Member Guide             
  -  POW/MIA Day Toolkit             
  -  USRJC 
-  About    -  Leadership             
  -  Vision-Mission-Values             
  -  DPAA Organizational Chart 
-  Contact    -  Contact Us             
  -  Join Us      -  Careers 
  -  Report a Site             
  -  Donate to the Mission 
-  Volunteer		 

## 

## Image Gallery

Search

Search

                              - Upload Date
                              - Photo Date
                              - Title

Share

----

Download Image: Small ()Medium ()Full Size (0.31 MB)

Tags:

Photo by:VIRIN: 

Photo Gallery
Case 1:07-cv-03225-PKC-DCF Document 29 Filed 01/14/2008 Page 1 of 2Case 1:07-cv-03225-PKC-DCF Document 29 Filed 01/14/2008 Page 2 of 2
Case 1:06-cv-15012-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 1 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15012-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 2 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15012-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 3 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15012-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 4 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15012-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 5 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15012-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 6 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15012-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 7 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15012-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 8 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15012-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 9 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15012-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 10 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15012-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 11 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15012-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 12 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15012-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 13 of 13
Exhibit 10.22
​

关于规范并减少关联交易的承诺函
Letter of Commitment on Standardizing and Reducing the Related Transactions
鉴于北京通美晶体技术股份有限公司(以下简称“发行人”)拟申请首次公开发行股票并在科创板上市,本企业作为发行人的控股股东,为保证发行人业务的持续发展、规范关联交易行为,特此承诺如下:
In view that Beijing Tongmei Xtal Technology Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “the Issuer”) plans to apply for an IPO (initial public offering) and be listed on the Science and Technology Innovation Board, and in order to guarantee the continuous development of the Issuer’s business and standardize the related transaction acts, our enterprise, as the Issuer’s controlling shareholder, hereby undertakes as follows:
1、在不对发行人及其他股东的利益构成不利影响的前提下,本企业将采取措施规范并尽量减少与发行人发生关联交易。
1. In the premise of not constituting the adverse impact on the benefits of the Issuer and other shareholders, our enterprise will take measures to standardize and minimize the related transactions with the Issuer.
2、对于正常经营范围内或存在其他合理原因确需发生或无法避免的关联交易,本企业及本企业控制的其他企业将与发行人依法签订交易协议,并按照有关法律、行政法规、部门规章、规范性文件和届时有效的《北京通美晶体技术股份有限公司章程》的规定履行批准程序,并保证该等关联交易均将基于公允定价的原则实施。
2. For the indeed necessary or inevitable related transactions within the scope of normal operation or for other reasonable reasons, our enterprise and other enterprises controlled by our enterprise will sign the transaction agreements with the Issuer according to law and perform the approval procedure according to the relevant laws, administrative regulations, departmental rules, normative documents and effective Articles of Association of Beijing Tongmei Xtal Technology Co., Ltd. at that time, and shall guarantee that such related transactions shall be implemented based on the principle of fair pricing.
3、本企业将严格按照相关规定履行必要的关联方回避表决等义务,履行批准关联交易的法定审批程序和信息披露义务。
3. Our enterprise will perform necessary obligations such as vote avoidance by related parties strictly according to the relevant stipulations, and perform the legal examination and approval procedure for related transactions and information disclosure obligation.
4、保证不利用关联交易非法转移发行人的资金、利润或从事其他损害发行人及其他股东、债权人利益的行为。

3/10/2022  9:21 AM  译文-10.22_、475-关Promise to manange related party transactions properly.docx  Folder-        1 of 3
​




Exhibit 10.22
​

4. Our enterprise guarantees not to utilize the related transactions to illegally transfer the Issuer’s capitals, profits or be engaged in other acts damaging the benefits of other shareholders and creditors.
​
(本页以下无正文)
(There is no text below this page)
​
​

3/10/2022  9:21 AM  译文-10.22_、475-关Promise to manange related party transactions properly.docx  Folder-        2 of 3
​




Exhibit 10.22
​

(本页无正文,为《关于规范并减少关联交易的承诺函》的签署页)
(Without text, this page is a signing page of Letter of Commitment on Standardizing and Reducing the Related Transactions)
​
​
	​
	AXT, Inc.
(盖章)
(Sealed)
​
签署:
Signed by:
姓名:MORRIS SHEN-SHIH YOUNG
Name: MORRIS SHEN-SHIH YOUNG
职务:授权代表
Title: authorized representative
​
日期:年月日
Date: MM/DD/YY



​

3/10/2022  9:21 AM  译文-10.22_、475-关Promise to manange related party transactions properly.docx  Folder-        3 of 3
​
#### STATE v. EVANS

No. 149 PC.

Case below: 36 N.C. App. 166.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 14 July 1978.
#### STATE v. CLIFTON

No. 129 PC.

Case below: 36 N.C. App. 155.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 denied 6 June 1978.
#### STATE v. BASDEN

No. 89 PC.

Case below: 19 N.C. App. 258.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 4 December 1973.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM 3RD QUARTER
1996 10QSB AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                       1,171,767
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  886,519
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    593,327
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,784,459
<PP&E>                                       4,914,713
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              14,844,249
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,247,167
<BONDS>                                      9,111,418
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       561,635
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,859,705
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                14,844,249
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             8,313,115
<CGS>                                        3,509,803
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                6,911,089
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             796,209
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                696,032
<INCOME-TAX>                                    69,500
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   626,532
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .28
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Case 1:07-cr-00351-DAB Document 6 Filed 09/14/2007 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

MEDTECH PRODUCTS, INC., 

Plaintiff,

v.

RANIER, LLC, et al., Defendants.

Consolidated Civil Action 

No.: 07 CV 03302-UA-LMS

RULE 7.1(a) STATEMENT of

POWER PRODUCTS, INC.

ECF Filed

MEDTECH PRODUCTS, INC., 

Plaintiff,

v.

DENTEK ORAL CARE, INC.,

Defendant.

MEDTECH PRODUCTS, INC., 

Plaintiff,

v.

POWER PRODUCTS, INC.,

Defendant.

Pursuant to Rule 7.1(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and to enable

District Judges and Magistrate Judges of the Court to evaluate possible disqualification or

recusal, the undersigned counsel for Defendant Power Products, Inc. (a non-public non- governmental party) makes the following disclosure:

1. Power Products, Inc., a corporation organized and existing in the State of

Missouri with its principal place of business at 3325 Wyoming Street, Kansas City, Missouri

Case 7:07-cv-03302-KMK-LMS Document 26 Filed 06/08/2007 Page 1 of 2
certifies that it is not a publicly traded company and that no publicly traded corporation owns any 

of its stock. Power Products, Inc. also does business as Splintek which is not a separate entity. 

Dated: June 8, 2007.

KIRKPATRICK & LOCKHART

 PRESTON GATES ELLIS LLP

BY: /s/ Kathy Dutton Helmer (KDH 9571)

One Newark Center, Tenth Floor

Newark, New Jersey 07102

(973) 848-4000

(973) 848-4001 (fax)

kathy.helmer@klgates.com

Attorneys for Defendant

Power Products, Inc.

Case 7:07-cv-03302-KMK-LMS Document 26 Filed 06/08/2007 Page 2 of 2
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      Exhibit 21

 
                                                      Percentage of Voting 
                                                           Securities
                              State or County of          Directly or 
                              Incorporation or          Indirectly Owned
SUBSIDIARIES:                   Organization             by the Company
------------                    ------------             --------------
BlueLine Software, Inc.           Minnesota                100%

Apertus Technologies Canada Inc.  Canada                   100%

BlueLine Software Europe B.V. *   Holland                  100%

Systems Strategies, Inc.          New York                 100%

Systems Strategies Limited        United Kingdom           100%

Apertus Inc. GMBH *               Germany                  100%

*        The Company is in the process of liquidating its foreign subsidiaries
         in Germany and Holland.
#### INSURANCE CO. v. HAYES

No. 23 PC.

Case below: 7 N.C. App. 294.

Petition for writ of *certiorari*to North Carolina Court of Appeals allowed 8 April 1970.