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

CERTIFICATION

I, Dieter P. Schilling, President and Chief Executive Officer of Delphax Technologies Inc. (the
Company), do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:



| |  |  | the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report),
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | - |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | - |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|       |  |                   |  |  |  |     |  |                                      
|------ |  | ----------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | -------------------------------------
|Dated: |  | December 28, 2007 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ Dieter P. Schilling              
|       |  |                   |  |  |  |     |  | Dieter P. Schilling                  
|       |  |                   |  |  |  |     |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
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 annual report of CDKNet.Com, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-KSB for the period ending June 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on October 14, 2003 (the "Report"), I, Steven A. Horowitz,
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350,
as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     (1)  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 result of operations of
          the Company.



/s/ Steven A. Horowitz
-----------------------------------
Steven A. Horowitz
Chief Executive Officer
October 14, 2003


A signed original of this certification has been provided to the Company and
will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-1882

JESSE E. BOYER, SR.; MARILYN L. BOYER,

Plaintiffs - Appellants,

versus

ANNIE LEE FINLEY; ROY FINLEY, Jr.; MICHAEL

TAYLOR, Jr.; MICHAEL J. BLITCH; STATE OF SOUTH

CAROLINA; ROBERT W. POLK, Attorney; ASHLEY

SURVEY COMPANY; PATRICK R. WATTS, Judge,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Charleston. David C. Norton, District Judge.

(2:07-cv-01868-DCN)

Submitted: December 13, 2007 Decided: December 18, 2007

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jesse E. Boyer, Sr., Marilyn L. Boyer, Appellants Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Jesse E. Boyer, Sr., and Marilyn L. Boyer appeal the

district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the

magistrate judge and dismissing their civil action without

prejudice. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we deny Appellants’ motion to proceed in forma

pauperis and dismiss the appeal for the reasons stated by the

district court. See Boyer v. Finley, No. 2:07-cv-01868-DCN (D.S.C.

Aug. 28, 2007). 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
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,**

#### as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

####  

Inconnection with the Form 10-Q of Koss Corporation (the “Company”) for thequarter ended December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Michael J. Koss, ChiefExecutive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuantto 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the information contained inthe Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditionand results of operations of the Company.

 
|   |   |   |   | /s/  Michael J. Koss          |   |
|--------|--------|--------|--------|-------------------------------|--------|
|   |   |   |   | Michael  J. Koss              |   |
|   |   |   |   | Chief  Executive Officer and  |
|   |   |   |   | Chief  Financial Officer      |
|   |   |   |   | Date:  February 14, 2008 |

 

Theforegoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350(as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002) andis not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.

 

----
Case 7:07-cv-03368-SCR Document 1 Filed 04/27/2007 Page 1 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-03368-SCR Document 1 Filed 04/27/2007 Page 2 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-03368-SCR Document 1 Filed 04/27/2007 Page 3 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-03368-SCR Document 1 Filed 04/27/2007 Page 4 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-03368-SCR Document 1 Filed 04/27/2007 Page 5 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-03368-SCR Document 1 Filed 04/27/2007 Page 6 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-03368-SCR Document 1 Filed 04/27/2007 Page 7 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-03368-SCR Document 1 Filed 04/27/2007 Page 8 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-03368-SCR Document 1 Filed 04/27/2007 Page 9 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-03368-SCR Document 1 Filed 04/27/2007 Page 10 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-03368-SCR Document 1 Filed 04/27/2007 Page 11 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-03368-SCR Document 1 Filed 04/27/2007 Page 12 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-03368-SCR Document 1 Filed 04/27/2007 Page 13 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-03368-SCR Document 1 Filed 04/27/2007 Page 14 of 14
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

STEPHEN D. WHELAN, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D18-3912

)

CITY OF TREASURE ISLAND, )

)

Appellee. )

________________________________ )

Opinion filed June 14, 2019.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for

Pinellas County; Jack Day, Senior Judge.

Stephen D. Whelan, pro se.

John M. Janousek and Dale A. Scott

of Bell & Roper, P.A., Orlando, for

Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

NORTHCUTT, KELLY, and SMITH, JJ., Concur.
IN THE SUPREME C OURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA Supreme Court Cause No. DA 22

- 0273

STATE OF MO NTANA

,

Plaintiff and Appellee

,

v.

ZACKARY MATTHEW MAAS

,

Defendant and Appellant

.

ORDER GRANTING E XTENSION OF TIME TO FILE TRANSCRIPTS NECESSARY FOR APPEAL

Upon co n sideration of Appellant ’ s motion for extension of time to file

the transcripts necessary for appeal , an d good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the court reporter is granted an

extension of ti me to and includ ing August 28, 2023 within which to file the

transcripts n ecessary for appeal

.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

August 8 2023

08/08/2023

Case Number: DA 23-0273
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Mary Horrigan, Respondent, *v.*Post-Standard Company et al., Appellants. State Industrial Commission, Respondent.

*Horrigan*v. *Post-Standard Co.,*184 App. Div. 921, affirmed.

(Argued October 2, 1918;

decided October 22, 1918.)

Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division, of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, *621entered May 7, 1918, affirming an award of the state industrial commission made under the Workmen's Compensation Law. Claimant’s husband was employed by defendant Post-Standard Company. He died August 8, 1917, from blood poisoning. It appeared that on the morning of July twenty-sixth he cut his fingers while working at home but felt no ill effects. His time of work for defendant commenced at seven-thirty in the evening. On the night of the twenty-seventh as part of his duties he cleaned out a urinal and in doing so put his injured hand into the water. Toward morning his finger began to swell and he complained of being ill. The infection continued and caused his death. The question was whether the poisoning was the result of the cut received by the deceased at his home, or whether the infection was received subsequently while engaged in cleaning the urinal, such latter work being in the course of his employment.

*Bertrand L. Pettigrew*and *Walter L. Glenney*for appellants.

*Merton E. Lewis, Attorney-General (E. C. Aiken*of counsel), for respondent.

Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Chase, Collin, Cuddeback, Hogan and Crane, JJ. Dissenting: McLaughlin, J. Not sitting: His cock, Ch. J.
Case 1:06-cv-15038-AKH Document 2 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 1 of 1
Case 7:07-cv-03302-KMK-LMS Document 152 Filed 04/29/2008 Page 1 of 4Case 7:07-cv-03302-KMK-LMS Document 152 Filed 04/29/2008 Page 2 of 4Case 7:07-cv-03302-KMK-LMS Document 152 Filed 04/29/2008 Page 3 of 4Case 7:07-cv-03302-KMK-LMS Document 152 Filed 04/29/2008 Page 4 of 4
Case 1:06-cv-14975-AKH     Document 6      Filed 08/09/2007     Page 1 of 2

Case 1:06-cv-14975-AKH     Document 6      Filed 08/09/2007     Page 2 of 2
#### GRAHAM AND SON, INC. v. BOARD OF EDUCATION

No. 86 PC.

Case below: 25 N.C. App. 163.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 6 June 1975.
Exhibit 10.5
 KEITHLEY INSTRUMENTS, INC.
Annual Incentive Compensation Plan
 (Amended and Restated as of January 1, 2008)
 Introduction
  Plan Objective
  Administration
  a.
    
    May amend, modify, or discontinue the Plan.b.
    
    Will designate Plan Participants at the officer level.c.
    
    Will review and approve the annual performance criteria.d.
    
    Will approve individual incentive compensation Awards to Participants who are
officers.e.
    
    Delegates to the Chief Executive Officer of the Company the power to designate
Plan Participants and approve incentive compensation Awards to Participants who are not
officers.f.
    
    Except as determined by the Committee, a Participant must be employed on
September 30 of the Award Term in order to be entitled to receive an Award hereunder.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Committee may approve a pro rata incentive
compensation Award for Participants who terminate employment prior to September 30 of
the Award Term, provided those Participants were actively at work for the first one
hundred and eighty days in the Award Term and (1) whose employment is terminated due to
death, Disability, Retirement or (2) at the recommendation of the Chief Executive
Officer.




---



##### 



Determination of Individual Incentive Compensation Awards
  Payment Date/Taxes
 th
 Definitions
    2




---



##### 



General Plan Provisions
 No Right of Employment
 Governing Law
 Miscellaneous
 Code Section 409A Compliance
  3




---



##### 



Limitation on Rights of Participants; No trust
 Payment to Guardian
 Effective Date
 Performance Targets
  Addendum
FY2008 Performance Targets
 Individual MaximumMetric
    
    Threshold
    
    
    Target
    
    
    Attained At(1)ROA
    
    
    19
    %
    
    
    34
    %
    
    
    ~40-45
    %Sales Growth
    
    
    1
    %
    
    
    14
    %
    
    
    ~28
    %
 (1)
    
    The Annual Bonus Plan does not cap the performance measures but rather caps an individuals
payout at 3 times target incentive award. The number provided in this column approximates the
level at which maximum payout would be capped and is a range because of the interplay between the
two measures.  KEITHLEY INSTRUMENTS, INC.By:
    /s/ Mark J. PlushTitle:  Vice President and Chief Financial Officer  4
<PAGE>   1
                                  EXHIBIT 23.1

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS



We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements of
Biomet, Inc. on Form S-8 (File Nos. 33-7361, 33-26826, 33-37561, 33-50268, 
33-65700, 33-75618 and 333-00331) and on Form S-3 (File Nos. 33-50420 and 
33-27008) and in the related Prospectus of our report dated July 3, 1997, on 
our audits of the consolidated financial statements and financial statement 
schedule of Biomet, Inc. and subsidiaries as of May 31, 1997 and 1996, and for
each of the three years in the period ended May 31, 1997, which report is 
included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

                                               COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.


South Bend, Indiana
August 15, 1997
Case 1:06-cv-14945-AKH Document 4 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 1 of 1
Case 1:06-cv-15005-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 1 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15005-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 2 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15005-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 3 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15005-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 4 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15005-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 5 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15005-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 6 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15005-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 7 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15005-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 8 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15005-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 9 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15005-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 10 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15005-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 11 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15005-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 12 of 13
Case 1:06-cv-15005-AKH Document 1 Filed 12/08/2006 Page 13 of 13
#### CHADBOURN, INC. v. KATZ

No. 93 PC.

Case below: 21 N.C. App. 284.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals allowed 1 July 1974.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-50045

Summary Calendar 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee 

v. 

SHAUN ALAN GLAZE, 

Defendant-Appellant 

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Western District of Texas 

USDC No. 7:16-CR-181-1 

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and SMITH, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

 Shaun Alan Glaze appeals the 57-month sentence imposed following his 

guilty-plea conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm. Glaze argues 

that the district court erred by imposing an enhancement pursuant to U.S.S.G. 

§ 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) because the Government failed to proffer sufficient evidence 

to establish that he was engaged in drug trafficking. 

 

* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

October 16, 2017

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 17-50045 Document: 00514197287 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/16/2017
No. 17-50045

2 

As Glaze’s objection below, which was based upon the firearm’s lack of 

proximity to the drugs and drug paraphernalia at issue, failed to alert the 

district court sufficiently to his current argument, plain error review applies. 

See United States v. Mondragon-Santiago, 564 F.3d 357, 361 (5th Cir. 2009). 

A district court’s determination that a firearm was possessed in connection 

with another offense for purposes of § 2K2.1(b)(6)(B) is a factual finding. See 

United States v. Coleman, 609 F.3d 699, 708 (5th Cir. 2010). “Questions of fact 

capable of resolution by the district court upon proper objection at sentencing 

can never constitute plain error.” United States v. Lopez, 923 F.2d 47, 50 (5th 

Cir. 1991); accord United States v. Delacruz, 801 F.3d 508, 512 (5th Cir. 2015). 

Thus, Glaze necessarily fails to show plain error. See Mondragon-Santiago, 

564 F.3d at 361.

AFFIRMED. 

 Case: 17-50045 Document: 00514197287 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/16/2017
**Exhibit 31.1**

I,Edward D. Segal, certify that:

1.  I have reviewed this annual report on Form10-K of Metron Technology N.V.;

2.Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a) Designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designedunder our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to theregistrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this reportour conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and

(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recentfiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annualreport) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5.The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process,summarize and report financial information; and

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.

Date:September 18, 2003

 
| /s/ EDWARD D. SEGAL                  |
|--------------------------------------|
| Edward D. Segal                      |
| Chairman and Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
Case 1:06-cv-15051-AKH Document 6 Filed 11/16/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:06-cv-15051-AKH Document 6 Filed 11/16/2007 Page 2 of 2
INTERGRAPH
----------
Business Operations and Finance Europe                         Memorandum
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             CONFIDENTIAL


Date:       February 18,1998

Ref:        9804

To:         Manfred Wittler

Copy:       Jim Meadlock          Manfred Wittler Personnel File

From:       Henk de Klerk

Subject:    Extension of your Netherlands Contract

-------------------------------------------------------------------------


With reference to the Contract between you and Intergraph European
Manufacturing BV, effective November 1, 1989 and subsequently assigned to
Intergraph European Manufacturing L.L.C. and Jeff Heath's memorandum dated
May 27, 1994 reference 03-034, the aforementioned contract is hereby
extended from November 1, 1997 until October 31, 1999 under the same terms
and conditions as referenced in Jeff Heath's mentioned memorandum with the
following change:

Your title is "Executive Vice President Sales and Support, Europe, Canada,
Latin America.


Approved on February 18, 1998, Hoofddorp, The Netherlands





/s/ Henk de Klerk                   /s/ Manfred Wittler        Feb. 18, 1998
-----------------                  --------------------        -------------
Henk de Klerk                      Manfred Wittler             Date
Director Business Operations       Executive Vice President
and Finance, Europe                Sales and Support
Managing Director Intergraph       Europe, Canada,
European Manufacturing L.L.C.      Latin America
# Continuation of the National Emergency With Respect to Iran

On November 14, 1979, by Executive Order 12170, the President declared a national emergency with respect to Iran pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701-1706) to deal with the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States constituted by the situation in Iran. Because our relations with Iran have not yet returned to normal, and the process of implementing the January 19, 1981, agreements with Iran is still underway, the national emergency declared on November 14, 1979, must continue in effect beyond November 14, 2005. Therefore, consistent with section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am continuing for 1 year this national emergency with respect to Iran.

                        This notice shall be published in the                         **Federal Register**                         and transmitted to the Congress.                    

[FR Doc. 05-22583

Billing code 3195-01-P