alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 24.1

                                POWER OF ATTORNEY


     WHEREAS,  the undersigned  officers and directors of Bionx  Implants,  Inc.
desire to  authorize  David W.  Anderson  and Michael J. O'Brien to act as their
attorneys-in-fact  and agents, for the purpose of executing and filing an Annual
Report on Form 10-K, including all amendments thereto,

     NOW, THEREFORE,

     KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS,  that each person whose  signature  appears
below  constitutes  and appoints  David W. Anderson and Michael J. O'Brien,  and
each of them, his true and lawful attorney-in-fact and agent, with full power of
substitution and resubstitution,  to sign the Bionx Implants, Inc. Annual Report
on Form  10-K  for the year  ended  December  31,  1998,  including  any and all
amendments  and  supplements  thereto,  and to file the same,  with all exhibits
thereto,  and other documents in connection  therewith,  with the Securities and
Exchange Commission,  granting unto said  attorneys-in-fact and agents, and each
of them, full power and authority to do and perform each and every act and thing
requisite and  necessary to be done in and about the  premises,  as fully and to
all intents and purposes as he might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and
confirming all that said  attorneys-in-fact and agents, or any of them, or their
or his substitute or substitutes,  may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue
hereof.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this power of attorney in
the following capacities on this __ day of March, 1999.

      SIGNATURE                                   TITLE

/s/David W. Anderson
___________________            President, Chief Executive Officer and Director
David W. Anderson


/s/David J. Bershad
______________________         Director
David J. Bershad


/s/Anthony J. Dimun
______________________         Director
Anthony J. Dimun


/d/David H. MacCallum
_____________________          Director
David H. MacCallum


/s/Pertti Tormala
_____________________          Director
Pertti Tormala


/s/Terry D. Wall
_____________________          Director
Terry D. Wall


/s/Michael J. O'Brien
_____________________          Vice  President,  Administration  and  Chief  
Michael J. O'Brien             Financial Officer (Chief Financial and Accounting
                               Officer)
THE MUNICIPAL FUND ACCUMULATION PROGRAM, INC.

FILE # 811-2694

ATTACHMENT 77O



|TRADE DATE | DESCRIPTION OF SECURITY                 | AMOUNT PURCHASED | ISSUE SIZE     | MEMBER OF UNDERWRITING SYNDICATE FROM WHOM FUND PURCHASED
|---------- | --------------------------------------- | ---------------- | -------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------
|1/13/00    | NJS Trans Corp  6.125  9/15/15          | $1,000,000       | $234,115,000   | Salomon Smith Barney                                     
|1/13/00    | NJS Trans Corp  6.125  9/15/14          | $6,600,000       | $234,115,000   | Salomon Smith Barney                                     
|1/27/00    | NYC Trans Fin. Auth Rev  6.25  11/15/17 | $5,000,000       | $560,000,000   | Bear Stearns                                             
|2/14/00    | NJS Hsg & Mtg Fin  6.25  11/1/26        | $1,500,000       | $153,540,000   | Ryan Beck                                                
|4/6/00     | NJS Tpk Auth Rev  6.0  1/1/11           | $12,000,000      | $1,467,375,000 | Smith Barney                                             
|4/28/00    | NYS Dorm Auth Mt. Sinai  6.5  7/1/25    | $7,500,000       | $499,940,000   | Goldman Sachs                                            
|5/11/00    | NYC  6.25  5/15/26                      | $10,075,000      | $666,385,000   | JP Morgan                                                
|           |                                         | $                | $              |                                                          
|           |                                         | $                | $              |                                                          
|           |                                         | $                | $              |
####                                                   EXHIBIT32: Rule 13a-14(b) Certification

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, theChief Executive Officer of Hamptons Extreme, Inc. (the “Company”) certifiesthat:

1.         The Quarterly Report on Form10-QSB of the Company for the period ended March 31, 2009 (the “Report”) fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

2.         The information contained inthe Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditionand results of operations of the Company.

 

Date:  May 19,2009                                 /s/ John Delaney  

                                                                John Delaney, Chief Executive Officer
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N
NO. 03-13-00771- CV

Robert Bul lins , Appellan t

v. Rita De nard, App ellee

F ROM TH E DISTRI CT COURT O F H AY S CO UNTY, 428TH JUDICI AL DISTRICT NO. 12- 0847 , H ONO RAB LE WI LLIAM H ENRY, JUDGE P RESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
On Fe bruar

y 13, 2014, this Court sent notice to appellant Ro bert Bullins that the cler k’s re cord a

nd repor ter’s r ecor d wer e due in this Court on Dec ember 23, 2013, and that notice
was rece ived from the di strict cler k t h at n o p aym ent had been rec eived or arr ang ements m ade for pay ment for the cler

k’s rec ord. This Court reque sted that appellant make arr ang ements for th e rec ord and submit a status repor

t. Appellant was notified that his appea l would be dismissed for wa nt of p ro s ec ution if he did respond to this Court by Fe bruar y 24, 2014. To date, appellant has not responde d to the Court’s notice. Acc ording ly , we dismiss the appea l f or want of prosec ution. See Tex. R. App. P . 42.3(b), ( c).__________________________________________ Melissa Goodwin, Jus tice Be fore J ustices Pury ear , Goodwin, and F ield Dismissed for Want of Prosecution Filed: Mar ch 14, 2014

2
AUDITOR’S CONSENT 

I have read the Province ofSaskatchewan Annual Report for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2004, on Form 18-K. I havecomplied with Canadian generally accepted auditing standards for an auditor’sinvolvement with offering documents. 

I consent to the use of myauditor’s reports dated June 9, 2004 on the Government of Saskatchewan SummaryFinancial Statements and the General Revenue Fund Financial Statements for the year endedMarch 31, 2004, and references to these reports, included in Volume I of the 2003-2004Public Accounts as Exhibit (e) to, and in the “Province of Saskatchewan CurrentDescription” in, the Province of Saskatchewan Annual Report for the fiscal year endedMarch 31, 2004, on Form 18-K. 

This consent is provided to theSecurities and Exchange Commission, Washington, D.C., according to the requirements of itslegislation and not for any other purpose.
Exhibit 32



Sonic Foundry, Inc.

Annual Report
on Form 10-K

For the Year Ended September 30, 2005



SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND

CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER



Statement



Solely for the
purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C.§1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, we, the undersigned Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer of Sonic Foundry, Inc. (the Company),
hereby certify, based on our knowledge, that the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended September 30, 2004 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



Dated: December 7, 2005



|       |  |                         
|------ |  | ------------------------
|By:    |  | /s/ Rimas P. Buinevicius
|By:    |  | Rimas P. Buinevicius    
|Title: |  | Chief Executive Officer 



|       |  |                        
|------ |  | -----------------------
|By:    |  | /s/ Kenneth A. Minor   
|By:    |  | Kenneth A. Minor       
|Title: |  | Chief Financial Officer



54
Exhibit 10.33

                     AMENDMENT #1 TO REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT

                                              March 22, 2002

Bluefly, Inc.
42 West 39 Street
New York, New York 10018

Gentlemen:

         Reference is made to the Reimbursement Agreement (the "Reimbursement
Agreement") dated as of March 30, 2001 between Bluefly, Inc., a Delaware
corporation, and Quantum Industrial Partners LDC, a Cayman Island limited
duration company. This will confirm that the Reimbursement Agreement is hereby
amended as follows:

         1. The dollar amount "$2,500,000" in the first sentence of Section 1 is
deleted and the dollar amount "$1,500,000" is substituted in its place and
stead.

         2. The second sentence in Section 1 is deleted in its entirety

         3. The following language is added to the end of Section 6 (a): "As
partial consideration for and a condition to its obtaining and maintaining the
Standby Letter of Credit from March 30, 2002 until March 30, 2003, the Soros
Entities shall each receive from Borrower a warrant substantially in the form
attached as Exhibit A hereto (provided, however, that the warrants issued
pursuant to this sentence shall have an exercise price equal to ONE DOLLAR AND
SIXTY-SIX CENTS ($1.66) and an expiration date of March 30, 2007 to purchase
that number of shares of the Common Stock obtained by multiplying SIXTY THOUSAND
(60,000) by such Soros Entity's Percentage Interest (as defined in Section 6(c)
below)."

         Except as hereinabove specifically set forth, the Reimbursement
Agreement shall continue unmodified.

                                            Very truly yours,

                                            QUANTUM INDUSTRIAL PARTNERS LDC


                                            By: /s/ Richard D. Holahan, Jr.
                                               ----------------------------
                                                 Name: Richard D. Holahan, Jr.
                                                Title: Attorney-in-fact
Agreed:

BLUEFLY, INC.

By: /s/ E. Kenneth Seiff
   ---------------------
    Name: E. Kenneth Seiff
    Title: Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
  <ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                          70,229
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  440,653
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,341,994
<PP&E>                                         248,317
<DEPRECIATION>                                   4,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,469,409
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          388,845
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       607,853
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,469,409
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               319,919
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  182,390
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              47,401
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                137,529
<INCOME-TAX>                                    37,016
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   100,513
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .14
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .14
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 15.2  KPMG LLP   Chartered AccountantsYonge Corporate Centre   4100 Yonge St.   Suite 200   North York, ON M2P 2H3

Telephone
Fax
Internet
(416) 228-7000
(416) 228-7123
www.kpmg.ca
  Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm  The Board of Directors Celestica Inc.  We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements on Forms S-8 (Nos. 333-71126, 333-66726, 333-63112, 333-88210 and 333-113591)and on Form F-3 (No. 333-155390)of Celestica Inc. of our report dated March 22, 2011, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Celestica Inc. (and subsidiaries) as at December 31, 2010 and 2009, and the consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive income (loss), shareholders equity and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2010 and our report dated March 22, 2011 with respect to the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2010, which reports appear in the December 31, 2010 annual report on Form 20-F of Celestica Inc.     KPMG LLP Chartered Accountants, Licensed Public Accountants  Toronto, Canada March 22, 2011  KPMG LLP is a Canadian limited liability partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International), a Swiss entity. KPMG Canada provides services to KPMG LLP.
Exhibit 12.2  CERTIFICATIONS  I, Paul Nicoletti, certify that:  1.     I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F
of Celestica Inc.;  2.     Based on my knowledge, this report does not
contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material
fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under
which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period
covered by this report;  3.     Based on my knowledge, the financial
statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly
present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations
and cash flows of the company as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;  4.     The companys other certifying officer(s) and
I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e))
and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and
15d-15(f)) for the company and have:  (a)   designed such disclosure controls and
procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed
under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the
company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others
within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is
being prepared;  (b)   designed such internal control over financial
reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be
designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the
reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements
for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles;  (c)   Evaluated the effectiveness of the companys
disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions
about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the
end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  (d)   Disclosed in this report any change in the
companys internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the
period covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the companys internal control over
financial reporting; and  5.     The companys other certifying officer and
I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the companys auditors and the audit committee of the
companys board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):


(a)   All significant deficiencies and material
weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial
reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the companys ability
to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and  (b)   Any fraud, whether or not material, that
involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the
companys internal control over financial reporting.  Date:   March 24,
  2009/s/ Paul NicolettiPaul NicolettiChief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 99.1



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


In connection with the Quarterly Report of Technology Research Corporation
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Robert S. Wiggins, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 (15 U.S.C. 78m or
          78o(d)); and

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






     August 14, 2003          /s/ Robert S. Wiggins
          Date                Robert S. Wiggins
                              Chairman of the Board and
                              Chief Executive Officer

























                                   - 17 -
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 03-2189

___________ Herman Jackson, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the District * of Minnesota. Flint Ink North American Corporation, * also known as Flint Ink Corporation, * * Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: February 13, 2004 Filed: August 27, 2004

___________ Before MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, JOHN R. GIBSON, and RILEY, Circuit Judges.

___________ MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judge. Herman Jackson filed a petition for rehearing in this case, maintaining that whether an environment is objectively hostile is always a question of fact for a properly instructed jury. We reject this argument. The question of whether an environment is sufficiently hostile to be actionable is a legal question, and, like any legal question, is a matter for the court to decide. In other words, a showing of some minimal level of harassment is necessary before a case is submissible to a jury. A court of course may decide this issue of submissibility on summary judgment. See, e.g. , Alagna v. Smithville R-II School Dist. , 324 F.3d 975, 979-81 (8th Cir. 2003).-2- We have, however, reexamined the record to determine whether Mr. Jackson's evidence was sufficient to survive summary judgment, and we now conclude that it was. We refer particularly to Mr. Jackson's deposition testimony (which neither party pointed us to directly) that his name was written in a shower at his workplace and that there was an arrow connecting his name with a burning cross and a KKK sign. We think that an objective observer would regard this combination of figures as a threat of serious bodily harm if not death to Mr. Jackson; and when this threat is combined with all of the other incidents that Mr. Jackson complained of, and which we detailed at length in our previous opinion, see Jackson v. Flint Ink N. Am. Corp. , 370 F.3d 791, 793-96 (8th Cir. 2004), we conclude that the present case is governed by Reedy v. Quebecor Printing Eagle, Inc. , 333 F.3d 906 (8th Cir. 2003).
We admit that the matter is not altogether free from doubt, and we think that this case is on the cusp of submissibility. But our best judgment is that an objective observer in Mr. Jackson's shoes would be justified in reacting to his situation in a way that would affect a term or condition of his employment.
We note that on remand Flint Ink may deny that it had notice of Mr. Jackson's environment or may assert that they took remedial action sufficient to absolve them from any liability. These matters were not before the court on appeal.
We grant rehearing and reverse the judgment of the district court as to Mr. Jackson's hostile work environment claim, and we remand this case to the district court for further proceedings.

______________________________
#### John Q. Hutchinson *v.*County Court of Raleigh County *et al.*

(No. 8508)

Submitted October 24, 1936.

Decided October 26, 1936.

(Opinion filed November 17, 1936.)

*Carl C. Sanders,*for relator.

*A. D. Preston, Ben H. Ashworth*and *W. W. Goldsmith,*for respondents.

Kenna, Judge:

John Q. Hutchinson, as a resident and taxpayer of Raleigh County and as Chairman of the Republican *2County Executive Committee, seeks a writ of mandamus requiring the County Court of Raleigh County to strike from the registration books of voters in Shady Springs Precinct of that county the names of certain enrollees of the Civilian Conservation Corps camp located in that precinct.

We are of the opinion that the proceedings before the county court were not sufficient to sustain the prayer of relator’s petition.

The petition shows that the notices pursuant to which the county court was asked to act under the provisions of Code, 3-2-10, were served on the 14th day of October, 1936, and were returnable before the county court on October 19, 1936. The statute referred to requires that the county court shall meet on the third Tuesday before a general election for the purpose of striking names from the registration books, and that day, this year, was October 13th.

It will be seen that the notices returnable before the county court came too late. They should have been made returnable either to the 13th of October or to such later day as, through necessary operation of law, the county court was required to postpone its sitting for the purpose of striking names from the registration lists. Considering that the registrars are required by the section that has already been referred to, to sit on the fourth Monday prior to the election and the day following for the purpose of correcting their registration books, and the fact that, this year, the third Tuesday prior to the election was the day following the fourth Monday, it is apparent that the county court could not sit for the purpose of correcting the registration books on the third Tuesday prior to the election because of the fact that on that day, the registrars themselves were sitting and had possession of the registration books. However, the registrars are required to return the books tu the county court within three days from the time of their sitting. In this case, that would have meant that the books would have been returned to the possession of the county court not later than October 16th. The latter date, therefore, *3was the last date to which the sitting of the county court for the purpose of striking names from the registration books can be held to have been continued by operation of law. The plaintiff’s notices here were returnable later even than that date. They, therefore, within the principles of the case of *Fred White et al.*v. *County Court of Kanawha County et al.,*117 W. Va. 815, 188 S. E. 380, in prohibition, came too late, and, do not furnish the basis for a writ of mandamus.

*Writ denied.*