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

CERTIFICATION of CEO and CFO 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of FS Energy and Power Fund (the "Company") for the three months ended
June 30, 2017, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Form 10-Q"), Michael C. Forman, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Edward T.
Gallivan, Jr., as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies, 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:



Dated:
August 10, 2017



/s/ MICHAEL C. FORMAN Michael C. Forman
Chief Executive Officer/s/ EDWARD T. GALLIVAN, JR. Edward T. Gallivan, Jr.
Chief Financial Officer


---



QuickLinks
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-2465

CHARLES VAUGHAN, individually and as Trustee

for CJC Enterprise Trust; JUDY VAUGHAN,

individually and as Trustee for CJC Enterprise

Trust,

Plaintiffs - Appellants,

and

CJC ENTERPRISE TRUST; ELC TRUST; VAUGHAN

TRUST; CJC PERSONNEL TRUST,

Plaintiffs,

versus

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Malcolm J. Howard, District

Judge. (CA-02-569-5-H(3))

Submitted: March 20, 2003 Decided: March 25, 2003

Before WILLIAMS and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
2

Charles Vaughan, Judy Vaughan, Appellants Pro Se. Laurie Allyn

Snyder, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Charles Vaughan and Judy Vaughan appeal from the district

court’s order adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation to

deny their petition to quash administrative summonses issued by the

Internal Revenue Service. We have reviewed the record and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by

the district court. See Vaughan v. United States, No. CA-02-569-5-

H(3) (E.D.N.C. Oct. 9, 2002). 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.

AFFIRMED
Exhibit 32.2





Certification of Principal Financial Officer


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 Quarterly Report of CBC Acquisition Corp. 1 (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Chi Wu, 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; and





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




/s/ Chi WuChi Wu

Principal Financial Officer
 February 15, 2011
#### FLORIDA STATE TURNPIKE AUTHORITY and Bituminous Casualty Corporation, Petitioners, v. Carl W. WHITTAKER and the Florida Industrial Commission, Respondents.

No. 38030.

Supreme Court of Florida.

March 12, 1969.

Eugene E. Williams, of Williams & Ja-bara, Miami, for petitioners.

Wheeler & Evans, Miami, Patrick H. Mears and J. Franklin Garner, Tallahassee, for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

By petition for writ of certiorari, we have for review an order of the Florida In*6dustrial Commission bearing date October 16, 1968.

We find that oral argument would serve no useful purpose and it is therefore dispensed with pursuant to Florida Appellate Rule 3.10, subd. e, 32 F.S.A.

Our consideration of the petitions, records and briefs leads us to conclude that there has been no deviation from the essential requirements of law.

The petition for certiorari is therefore denied.

Attorney’s fee in the amount of $250.00 is awarded to respondent-Carl W. Whitta-ker’s attorney.

It is so ordered.

ROBERTS, Acting C. J., and DREW, THORNAL, CARLTON and ADKINS, JJ., concur.
Order entered October 5, 2020

In The



### Court of Appeals

**Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**

No. 05

- 19

- 01449

- CV

DOUGLAS HUNDERMAN AN D DOROTHY HUNDERMAN, Appellant s

V.

NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC, ET AL, Appellee s

On Appeal from the 101st Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC

- 19

- 09043

O RDER

Before Justices Myers, Nowell, and Evans

Be fore t he Court is appellant s ’ September 17, 2020 motion for rehearing and

to rei nstate the appeal. Our records show this ca se was di smissed for want of

prosecution, in particular because ap pellant s f ailed to file a brief. In his motion,

appellant s ’ c ounsel contends h e filed the brief via the Texas electronic filing

system, but was unable to v erify it had been filed on the Court ’ s ca se management

syste m due to the ransom war e attack . Appel l an t s ’ motion is not verified orotherw ise supported with evid ence showing the brief was filed with the electronic

filing system

.

Appel lant s are requested to provide ev id ence in support of the motion, via

affid avit o r oth erwise, within TEN DAYS of the da te of this order. F a i l u r e t o d o

s o w i l l r e s u l t i n t h e d e n i a l o f t h e m o t i o n w i t h o u t f u r t h e r n o t i c e

.

Appellee s may file a r esponse no later than TEN DAYS from t he later of the

date appell ant s files ev idence or, if not filed, from the deadline for appe llant s to

f

ile evidence.

/s/ DAVID EVANS

JUSTICE
i i i i i i



### MEM ORA ND UM OP INION No

. 04 -0 8- 00 37 7- CR T h e STA TE of Texas, Appellant

v . Kather ine ZA WORA , Appellee Fr om the County

Court at L aw Numbe r 4, B exar County , Texas Trial Court No. 883209 Honora ble Sarah G arr ahan- Moulder, Judge Pre siding PER C URI AM Sitt ing: Alma L . L ópez, Chief J ustice

Catherine Stone, Justi ce Steven C. Hilbig, Just ice Deliver ed and F iled: J une 18, 2008 MOTI ON TO D I SMI SS GR ANTED; DI SMI SSED Ap pe lla nt, the S tat e of Texa s, ha s f ile d a mot ion to d ism iss thi s a

pp e a l. T he mot ion

is g rante d, and this appea l is dism issed. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 42.2(a). PER C URI AM Do no t pu bli sh
#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Samuel Lee STARKS v. C. Murray HENDERSON, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary.

No. 54294.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 1, 1974.

In re: Samuel Lee Starks applying for remedial writs and habeas corpus.

Writ denied. On the basis of the evi-dentiary hearing and of the sanity hearing found in the record of a previous application to this court, Docket No. 51,315, cer-tiorari denied, 258 La. 571, 247 So.2d 392, involving somewhat similar allegations, we find no merit to the relator’s contentions.

BARHAM, J., recused.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

         We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Annual Report
(Form 10-K) of PEMSTAR Inc. of our report dated May 13, 2002 except for Note 17,
as to which the date is June 28, 2002, included in the 2002 Annual Report to
Shareholders of PEMSTAR Inc.

         Our audits also included the financial statement schedule of PEMSTAR
Inc. listed in Item 14(a). This schedule is the responsibility of the Company's
management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion based on our audits. In
our opinion, the financial statement schedule referred to above, when considered
in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole, presents fairly
in all material respects the information set forth therein.

         We also consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement (Form S-8, No. 333-44044) pertaining to the PEMSTAR Inc. 1994 Stock
Option Plan, 1995 Stock Option Plan, 1997 Stock Option Plan, 1999 Amended and
Restated Stock Option Plan, 2000 Stock Option Plan and 2000 Employee Stock
Purchase Plan and the Registration Statement (Form S-3, No. 333-75284)
pertaining to Common Stock, Preferred Stock, Debt Securities, Depository Shares,
Securities Warrants and Units of our report dated May 13, 2002 except for Note
17, as to which the date is June 28, 2002 with respect to the consolidated
financial statements of PEMSTAR Inc. incorporated herein by reference and our
report included in the preceding paragraph with respect to the financial
statement schedule included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) of PEMSTAR Inc.
for the year ended March 31, 2002.

                                             /s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Minneapolis, Minnesota
June 28, 2002
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . 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 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-40481 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus
RENE GONZALEZ-DAVILA, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. M-97-CR-385-1

- - - - - - - - - - October 20, 1998 Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, and WIENER and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Court-appointed counsel for Rene Gonzales-Davila, has filed a brief as required by Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Our independent review of the brief and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3944 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3944

To provide for a demonstration program to develop and implement special 
     management practices for certain National Forest System lands.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 2, 1994

   Mr. LaRocco (for himself, Mr. Fazio, and Ms. English of Arizona) 
   introduced the following bill; which was referred jointly to the 
            Committees on Natural Resources and Agriculture

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To provide for a demonstration program to develop and implement special 
     management practices for certain National Forest System lands.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Stewardship End-Result Contracts 
Demonstration Act''.

SEC. 2. DEMONSTRATION PROGRAM FOR THE SPECIAL USE OF TIMBER REVENUES.

    (a) Demonstration Program.--The Secretary of Agriculture may carry 
out a demonstration program on National Forest System lands described 
in subsection (b) to develop and implement management practices that 
are ecosystem based and end-result oriented. The Secretary shall carry 
out the demonstration program through the officers of the Forest 
Service in charge of the National Forest System lands described in such 
subsection.
    (b) Applicability.--The demonstration program shall apply to the 
management of the following projects on National Forest System lands:
            (1) The Priest Lake District project, Idaho Panhandle 
        National Forest.
            (2) The Angora project, Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit.
            (3) The Kendrick project, Coconino National Forest.
    (c) Authorization.--Under the demonstration program, the Secretary 
of Agriculture may apply the value, or a portion of the value, of 
timber removed under a stewardship end-result contract as an offset 
against the cost of stewardship services received, including site 
preparation, replanting, silviculture programs, recreation, wildlife 
habitat enhancement, and other multiple-use enhancements.
    (d) Compliance With Environmental Requirements.--Nothing in this 
Act shall be construed to alter the responsibility of the Secretary to 
comply with environmental laws applicable to the lands of the National 
Forest System described in subsection (b).
    (e) Expiration of Authority.--The authority provided in subsection 
(c) shall expire on December 31, 1994.

                                 <all>
```
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



In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Digipath, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31,
2019 (the “Report”) I, Todd Peterson, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 USC Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge and belief:



| | (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 results of operations
    of the Company.



Dated:
May 15, 2019



|/s/
    Todd Peterson                      | 
|------------------------------------------ | 
|Todd
    Peterson, Chief Financial Officer | 



This
certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent
required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, as amended.
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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Aspect Software Group Holdings Ltd. (the Company) for the three months ended
March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned, James D. Foy, President and Chief Executive Officer, and Michael J. Provenzano III, Executive Vice President, Finance
and Chief Financial Officer, of the Company, certifies, to the best knowledge and belief of the signatory, 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; and
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|                                      |  |  |  |                                                              
|------------------------------------- |  |  |  | -------------------------------------------------------------
|                                      |  | 
|/s/ JAMES D. FOY                      |  |  |  | /s/ MICHAEL J. PROVENZANO III                                
|President and Chief Executive Officer |  |  |  | Executive Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer
|                                      |  | 
|Date: May 16, 2011                    |  |  |  | Date: May 16, 2011
#### Eliecer Genard GONZALEZ, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 72-415.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Nov. 14, 1972.

Rehearing Denied Dec. 5, 1972.

Sky E. Smith, Miami, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Richard D. Rosen, Legal Intern, Joel D. Rosenblatt, Supervising Atty., for appellee.

Before BARKDULL, C. J., and CHARLES CARROLL and HENDRY, JJ-

PER CURIAM.

We have considered the various points raised by appellant, but find no merit therein. The evidence amply supports the entry of the judgments of conviction, and appellant has failed to adequately preserve his attack upon the counts relating to his sale and possession of cocaine, a narcotic drug, on August 13, 1971.

We remand with directions to vacate the sentence imposed pursuant to convictions under the counts charging unlawful possession of cocaine, since these sentences are contrary to the rule enunciated in Yost v. State, Fla.App. 1971, 243 So.2d 469 and Easton v. State, Fla.App. 1971, 250 So.2d 294. In all other respects, the judgments and sentences are affirmed.

Affirmed in part and reversed in part with directions.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-8595
CORNELIUS TUCKER, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CAPTAIN BRANKER; SERGEANT DINEHART, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, District Judge. (CA-95-764-5-BR) Submitted: July 25, 1996 Decided: August 12, 1996 Before LUTTIG and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Cornelius Tucker, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. The district court assessed a filing fee in accordance with Evans v. Croom , 650 F.2d 521 (4th Cir. 1981), cert. denied , 454 U.S. 1153 (1982), and dismissed the case without prejudice when Appellant failed to comply with the fee order. Finding no abuse of discretion, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal. We deny Appellant's motion to disqualify the district judge. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented inthe materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### Hafner, Appellee, *v.*Carl F. Straub & Co. et al., Appellants.

(No. 30416

Decided October 10, 1945.)

*Mr. Julius Negin*and *Messrs. Halle, Haber, Berick & McNulty,*for appellee.

*Mr. C. F. Taplin,*for appellants.

It is ordered and adjudged that this appeal as of right be, and the same hereby is, dismissed for the reason that no debatable constitutional question is-involved.

*Appeal dismissed.*

Weygandt, C. J., Zimmerman, Bell, Williams, Turner, Matthias and Hart, JJ., concur.
252 La. 837

#### Thomas H. JENKINS, Individually and for the Community, and Olivia A. Jenkins, Individually v. GREYHOUND LINES, INC., et al.

No. 49363.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Oct. 3, 1968.

In re: Thomas H. Jenkins, Individually and for the Community, and Olivia A. Jenkins, Individually applying for certio-rari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, Parish of Calcasieu. 210 So.2d 390.

Writ refused. On the facts found by the Court of Appeal, there is no error of law in its judgment.
`[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3617 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.3617
                       One Hundred Third Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America


                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
 the twenty-fifth day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-
                                  four


                                 An Act

  
 
  To amend the Everglades National Park Protection and Expansion Act of 
1989,

                         and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, That section 104 of the 
Everglades National Park Protection and Expansion Act of 1989 (16 U.S.C. 
410r-8) is hereby amended by adding at the end thereof the following new 
subsection:
    ``(k)(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, the 
Secretary is authorized to use funds appropriated pursuant to this Act, 
including any available funds appropriated to the National Park Service 
for construction in the Department of the Interior and Related Agencies 
Appropriations Acts for fiscal years 1991 through 1994 for project 
modifications by the Army Corps of Engineers, in such amounts as 
determined by the Secretary, to provide Federal assistance to the State 
of Florida (including political subdivisions of the State) for 
acquisition of lands described in paragraph (4).
    ``(2) With respect to any lands acquired pursuant to this 
subsection, the Secretary may provide not more than 25 percent of the 
total cost of such acquisition.
    ``(3) All funds made available pursuant to this subsection shall be 
transferred to the State of Florida or a political subdivision of the 
State, subject to an agreement that any lands acquired with such funds 
will be managed in perpetuity for the restoration of natural flows to 
the park or Florida Bay.
    ``(4) The lands referred to in paragraph (1) are those lands or 
interests therein adjacent to, or affecting the restoration of natural 
water flows to, the park or Florida Bay which are located east of the 
park and known as the Frog Pond, Rocky Glades Agricultural Area, and the 
Eight-and-One-Half Square-Mile Area.''.







                                Speaker of the House of Representatives.







                             Vice President of the United States and    
                                                President of the Senate.`
I

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4041

To amend the District of Columbia Self-Government and Governmental Reorganization Act to provide for the appointment of the ranking members

of the Committee on the District of Columbia of the House of Representatives and the Subcommittee on General Services, Federalism, and the

District of Columbia of the Committee on Governmental Affairs of the

Senate to the National Capital Planning Commission.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 16, 1994

Mr. BLILEY (for himself, Mr. ROHRABACHER, Mr. PAXON, and Mr.

BALLENGER) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on the District of Columbia

A BILL

To amend the District of Columbia Self-Government and

Governmental Reorganization Act to provide for the appointment of the ranking members of the Committee

on the District of Columbia of the House of Representatives and the Subcommittee on General Services, Federalism, and the District of Columbia of the Committee

on Governmental Affairs of the Senate to the National

Capital Planning Commission.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 4041 IH

1 SECTION 1. APPOINTMENT OF RANKING MEMBERS OF DIS2 TRICT OF COLUMBIA COMMITTEES TO NA3 TIONAL CAPITAL PLANNING COMMISSION.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 2(b) of the Act entitled

5 ‘‘An Act providing for a comprehensive development of the

6 park and playground system of the National Capital, ap7 proved June 6, 1924 (sec. 1–2002(b), D.C. Code), is

8 amended by inserting ‘‘and ranking members’’ after

9 ‘‘chairmen’’.

10 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

11 subsection (a) shall take effect 30 days after the date of

12 the enactment of this Act.

Æ