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

Certification  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2001.

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

In  connection  with the  Quarterly  Report  of PARK HILL  CAPITAL  I  CORP.(the
"Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the quarter  ended August 31, 2001, as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
Francis Mailhot, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C.  1350, as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of
2001, that:

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:  September 19, 2005                      /s/ Francis Mailhot
                                                --------------------------------
                                                Francis Mailhot,
                                                Chief Executive Officer
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Homeland Security

###### Coast Guard

          - 46 CFR Part 162
          - [Docket No. USCG-2004-18939]
          - RIN 1625-AA90

      ( print page 6358)    

### Correction

In rule document E9-802 beginning on page 3364 in the issue of Friday, January 16, 2009 make the following correction:

§162.050-15

On page 3384, in §162.050-15(f)(3)(iii), in the second line after the equation, “paragraph b(f)(1)” should read “paragraph (f)(1)”.

[FR Doc. Z9-802 Filed 2-6-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23

- 1794

MARILYNN M. MCRAE , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. DONNIE HARRISON, Sheriff , Defendant

- Appellee , and SAMUEL B. HIGDON; GENE D. BUTLER , Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Raleigh

. Louise W. Flanagan, District Judge. ( 5:17

- cv - 00023

- FL )

Submitted : January 9, 2024 Decided: April 8, 2024

Before GREGORY and THACKER , Circuit Judges , and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Marilynn M. McRae , Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 23-1794 Doc: 5 Filed: 04/08/2024 Pg: 1 of 22 PER CURIAM: Marilynn M. McRae appeals the district court’s order denying her motions for relief from the judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(a), (b), 7 9

. * Limiting our review to the issues raised in the informal brief, see 4th Cir. R. 34(b); Jackson v. Lightsey , 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014), w e have reviewed the record and discern no abuse of discretion in the district court’s denial of those motions, see Aikens , 652 F.3d at 501 (stating standard of review) ; Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(c)(1) (establishing one

- year limit on filing of Rule 60(b)(1)

- (3) motions)

. Accordingly, we affirm the district court ’s order

. McRae v. Harrison , No. 5:17

-

cv - 00023

- FL (E.D.N.C. May 31, 2023) . We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED

* To the extent McRae seeks to challenge the district court’s prior grant of summary judgment to Appellee Donnie Harrison on McRae’s claims, or the court’s denial of her May 2022 Rule 60(b) motion, those orders are not properly before us in this appeal. See United States v. Cannady , 63 F.4th 259, 266 (4th Cir. 2023) (discussing mandate rule); Aikens v. Ingram , 652 F.3d 496, 501 (4th Cir. 2011) (“[A]n appeal from denial of Rule 60(b) relief does not bring up the underlying judgment for review.” (internal quotation marks omitted)); Bowles v. Russell , 551 U.S. 2 0 5, 2 1 4 ( 2007 ) (“[T]he timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional requirement.”). USCA4 Appeal: 23-1794 Doc: 5 Filed: 04/08/2024 Pg: 2 of 2
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 1 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 2 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 3 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 4 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 5 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 6 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 7 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 8 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 9 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 10 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 11 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 12 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 13 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 14 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 15 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 16 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 17 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 18 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 19 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 20 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 21 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 22 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 23 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 24 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 25 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 26 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 27 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 28 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 29 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 30 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 31 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 32 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 33 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 34 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 35 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 36 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 37 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 38 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 39 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 40 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 41 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 42 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 43 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 44 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 45 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 46 of 47
Case 20-12895-PDR Doc 147 Filed 08/18/21 Page 47 of 47
# STATEOFLOUISIANA COURTOFAPPEAL,FIRSTCIRCUIT

JOHN C. VALLUZZO AND JANETTE H. VALLUZZO VERSUS CUSIMANO CONSTRUCTION, INC., BILLIEA. BRIAN, INC., TRINITY BUSINESS GROUP, LLC, ABC INSURANCE COMPANY, DEF INSURANCE COMPANY, AND XYZ INSURANCE COMPANY NO. 2022 CW 1257



### FEBRUARY 1, 2023

In Re: Stutzman Sawing, LLC, applying for supervisory writs, 19th Judicial District Court, Parish of East Baton Rouge, No. 707022.



### BEFORE: GUIDRY, C.J., WOLFEANDMILLER, JJ. WRIT GRANTED WITH ORDER. We vacate the trial court's August 24, 2022 judgment, which denied the Motion for Summary Judgment filed by the third party defendant, Stutzman Sawing, LLC. The trial court failed to "state on the record or in writing the reasons for granting or denying the motion" as required by La. Code Civ. P. art. 966(C)(4). See 

### James as CoTrustees ofAddison Family Trustv. Strobel, 2019-0787 (La. App. 1st Cir. 6/24/20), 2020 WL 3446635 (unpublished) (recognizing La. Code Civ. P. art. 966(C)(4) as "mandatory"). Thus, this matter is remanded to the trial court for compliance with La. Code Civ. P. art. 966(C)(4).

COURT OFAPPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT 

# O\.~ DEPUTY CLERK OF COURT FOR THE COURT 

### JMG EW SMM
Samuel Christopher GOLDEN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-1747

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

May 7, 2018 Rehearing Denied June 21, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Case 21-20622-PDR Doc 4 Filed 11/05/21 Page 1 of 1
**Exhibit 99.1**

**INDEMNIFICATION AGREEMENT**

THIS INDEMNIFICATION AGREEMENT (the “Agreement”) ismade as of the 1st day of March, 2006 by and between NessTechnologies, Inc. (“Company”) and Gartner, Inc. (“Gartner”).

Gartner hereby consents to the use by Company inCompany’s Annual Report on Form 10-K filed with the SEC and allamendments thereto (“Filing”), of the Gartner material set forth on theattached Exhibit A (“Gartner Information”), subject to the following termsand conditions.

The Gartner Information in the Filing shall bepresented as representing data or viewpoints published by Gartner, and not as arepresentation of fact. Company acknowledges that Gartner is unable to assumeresponsibility for third parties’ reliance on information contained in the Filing,including Gartner Information, and agrees to indemnify and hold harmlessGartner, its officers, employees and agents, from and against any and allclaims liabilities and losses (including reasonable attorney’s fees) arising,directly or indirectly, out of the use of the Gartner Information in theFiling.

ThisAgreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of theState of New York, without reference to conflict of law principles.
| Ness Technologies, Inc. |   | Gartner, Inc. |
|------------------------------|--------|--------------------|
| By:                          |   | /s/ ILAN ROTEM     |   | By: |   | /s/ KIM WHEELER |
| Name:                        |   | Ilan Rotem         |   | Name: |   | Kim Wheeler |
| Title:                       |   | Secretary          |   | Title: |   | Vendor Relations Manager |
| Date:                        |   | March 1, 2006 |   |   |   |   |

 

----

Exhibit A

Ness Technologies Inc.would like to include the following quotes in our 10-K filing with theSEC:

**Citation No. 1**

Gartner Inc., an independent industry analyst,forecasted in its Gartner Dataquest Market Databook of December 2005 thatthe global IT services market will grow from approximately $617.4 billion in2005 to approximately $759.8 billion in 2009, a compound annual growth rate ofapproximately 5.3%.

Gartner source documentnumber: G00137566 titled “Gartner Dataquest Market Databook, December 2005Update,” Table 1-1, published 27 January 2006.

----

**Citation No. 2**

In 2005, the North American market alone representedapproximately 44% of total worldwide IT services spending, according to theGartner Dataquest Market Databook of December 2005, which concentration isexpected to continue in the future.

Gartner source document number: G00137566, titled “GartnerDataquest Market Databook, December 2005 Update,” Table 2-11,published 27 January 2006.

----
Make Model

3DR (3Drobotics) X8-M Copter

3DR (3Drobotics) Aero-M Fixed Wing

3DR (3Drobotics) IRIS+

3DR (3Drobotics) X8+

ACCURATE AUTOMATION CORPORATION EyeFly

Aerial Technology AG550

AgEagle RAPID

AIRCOVER QR425

AIRCOVER QRT825

Altavian Nova F6500

Altavian Nova R8400

ATI/AG RG550

ATI/AG AGBOT

ATI/AG AGHELI

delair-tech DT-18 UAV

delair-tech DT-26 UAV

dji Inspire 1

dji Phantom 1

dji Phantom 2 Vision

dji Phantom 2 Vision+

dji Phantom 3

dji Phantom FC40

EMT Fancopter

HEIGHT TECH HT-6

HEIGHT TECH HT-8 C180

HEIGHT TECH HT-8 / HT-8 C

JAVAD TRIUMPH-F1

MICRODRONES MD4-200

MICRODRONES MD4-1000

PHOENIX AERIAL SYSTEMS TerraHawk

PHOENIX AERIAL SYSTEMS AL3 S1000 UAV

PHOENIX AERIAL SYSTEMS Vapor 55 UAV

PrecisionHawk Lancaster

RIEGL RiCOPTER

senseFly eBee

senseFly eXom

senseFly eBee Ag

senseFly eBee RTK

senseFly swingle CAM

TOPCON SIRIUS PRO

Trimble UAS UX5

SatStellar, LLC 
Trimble UAS UX5 HP

XACT SENSE MAX-8

XACT SENSE SSP-360
COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER LAWS 27. The commitments ofthe EPA in this Agreement are subject to the availability of appropriated funds applicable for those purposes. No provision ofthis Agreement shall be interpreted so as to constitute a commitment or requirement that EPA obligate or pay funds in contravention of the Anti

-Deficiency Act, 31 U.S.C. § 1341,or take actions in contravention of the APA,5 U.S.C. §§ 551 -559, 701 -706,the Clean Air Act, or any other law or regulation,either substantive or procedural. REPRESENTATIVE AUTHORITY 28. Each undersigned representative ofthe parties to this Agreement certifies that he is fully authorized by the party to enter into and execute the terms and conditions ofthis Agreement. By signature below, all Settling Parties consent to this Agreement.

FOR EPA: FOR SIERRA CLUB: Ignacia S. Moreno,Assistant Attorney General ~~~ / ~— ~`-, Environment & Naturai Resources Division ~ Robert Ukeiley Law Office ofRobert Ukeiley .I~es 'ca O'Donnell 435R Chestnut Street, Ste. 1 E ironmental Defense Section Berea, KY 40403 Environment &Natural Resources Division (859)986-5402 U.S. Department ofJustice P.O. Box 23986 Date: ~. ~ Washington, D.C. 20026-3986 (202)305-0851 Date: ~ 2- t`~. ~1
Joseph Michael STEVENS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-2837

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed January 24, 2018.

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
EX PARTE B.J.S.

1160485 (CR-15-1305)

Supreme Court of Alabama.

April 14, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Cert. denied.
## Breadcrumb

-  Publications 
-  Articles 

#           Wildlife species richness in shelterbelts: test of a habitat model      

      September 1, 1992    

Shelterbelts are human-made habitats consisting of rows of shrubs and trees planted either in fields or on the windward side of farmstead dwellings. Shelterbelts provide wooded habitat for a large variety of birds and other wildlife. A model to predict wildlife species richness in shelterbelts (Schroeder 1986) was published as part of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Habitat Suitability Index (HSI) model series (Schamberger et al. 1982). HSI models have been used extensively by wildlife managers and land use planners to assess habitat quality. Several HSI models have become the focus of a test program that includes analysis of field data for corroboration, refutation, or modification of model hypotheses. Previous tests of HSI models focused either on single species (e.g., Cook and Irwin 1985, Morton et al. 1989, Schroeder 1990) or examined portions of HSI models, such as the relationship between cavity abundance and tree diameter (Allen and Corn 1990). The shelterbelt model, however, assesses habitat value at the community level. The effects of habitat characteristics, area, and perimeter on diversity and abundance of bird and mammal species in shelterbelts were first studied by Yahner (1983a, b). Johnson and Beck (1988) confirmed the importance of shelterbelts to wildlife and identified area, perimeter, and diversity and complexity of vegetation as key measurements of habitat quality. The shelterbelt model incorporates both specific habitat variables and larger scale parameters, such as area and configuration, to predict wildlife species richness. This shift in perspective comes at a time of increasing interest in conservation and planning beyond the species levels (e.g., Graul and Miller 1984, Hutto et al. 1987, Schroeder 1987: 26).

We report results of a 3-year study of spatial and vegetative parameters and their relationship to breeding bird species richness (BSR) in 34 Kansas shelterbelts. Our objectives were to test the hypothesis presented in the original shelterbelt model (Schroeder 1986) that species richness can be predicted by shelterbelt characteristics and to investigate alternative models for predicting BSR in shelterbelts.

## Citation Information

### Study Area

### Explore Search

                  - United States
                  - Great Bend Prairie
                  -  Great Plains
                  - kansas

View All **
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2


                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER



Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted), Daniel R. Hudspeth, the Chief Financial Officer of Allos
Therapeutics, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certifies that, to the best of his
knowledge:

         (1) The Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended
September 30, 2002, to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 99.2 (the
"Periodic Report"), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

         (2) The information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition of the Company at the end of
the period covered by the Periodic Report and result of operations of the
Company for the period covered by the Periodic Report.


Dated: November 12, 2002


                                             /s/ Daniel R. Hudspeth
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             Daniel R. Hudspeth
                                             Chief Financial Officer
### /s



# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Anto nio, Texas** 

January 8, 2015

N o. 04

- 14

- 00880

- CV

Stacy Joanna MAURICIO

, Appellant

v.

Rueben MAURICIO

, Appellee

From the 438th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014

- CI

- 06556 Honorable John D. Gabriel, Jr., Judge Presiding

ORDER

The reporter’s record was due on December 22, 2014. On January 5, 2015, the court reporter responsible for preparing the reporter’s record in this appeal filed a notification of late record, stating that the appellant has failed to pay or make arrangements to pay the fee for preparing the reporter’s record.

We, therefore, ORDER appellant to provide written pro of to this court within ten days of the date of this order that either (1) the reporter’s fee has been paid or arrangements have been made to pay the reporter’s fee; or (2) appellant is entitled to appeal without paying the reporter’s fee. If appellant fai ls to respond within the time provided, appellant’s brief will be due within thirty days from the date the clerk’s record is filed, and the court will only consider those issues or points raised in appellant’s brief that do not require a reporter’s record for a decision. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 37.3(c).

___________________________________ Karen Angelini, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on

this 8th day of January, 2015

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-13-0000024 27-NOV-2015 08:36 AM
Michael HESTER, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Danielle G. GUEDES, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-2165

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

July 19, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Atmospheres

Filters

              - science_science(3)
              - products_publications(19)
              - products_web_tools(1)
              - multimedia_video(1)
              - multimedia_video-149194(1)
              - (-)other_basic-42(1)

## By Location

              - california(1)
              - colorado(1)
              - (-)virginia(1)

## By Year

General        October 8, 2021        20-41. Quantitative coal mine methane research and development of scenario analysis tools to reduce atmospheric emissions
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

IN RE: TRUST UNDER AGREEMENT OF 

PAULINE O. WALKER DATED JULY 17, 

2001, AS AMENDED JUNE 9, 2014

PETITION OF: KATHERINE W. 

BANTLEON AND ELIZABETH W. MECKE

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 158 WAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 21st day of October, 2019, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
Phillip BREWER, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D18-98

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed May 2, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-40753

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ABEL VASQUEZ-REYES, also known as Abel Lopez-Vasquez,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 7:16-CR-41-1

Before JOLLY, PRADO, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Abel Vasquez-Reyes

has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with 

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 

229 (5th Cir. 2011). Vasquez-Reyes has not filed a response. We have reviewed 

counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We 

concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous 

 

* 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

February 21, 2017

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 16-40753 Document: 00513882380 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/21/2017
No. 16-40753

2

issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw 

is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the 

APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

 Case: 16-40753 Document: 00513882380 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/21/2017
##### 



Exhibit 23.1 Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
 The Board of Directors and
Stockholders
Suntron Corporation: We consent to incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement No. 333-89238, on Form S-8
of Suntron Corporation of our report dated February 28, 2005, except for Note 2 which is as of
April 5, 2005, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Suntron Corporation and
subsidiaries as of December 31, 2003 and 2004, and the related consolidated statements of
operations, stockholders equity, and cash flows and financial statement schedule for each of the
years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2004, which report appears in the December 31,
2004 annual report on Form 10-K of Suntron Corporation. /s/ KPMG LLP Phoenix, Arizona
April 5, 2005