alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 32

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT BY
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


         In connection with the Quarterly Report of Apex Resources Group,
Inc.,on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, John Ray Rask, Principal Executive Officer and John M. Hickey,
Principal Financial 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.



Date:   November 7, 2003            /s/
                                   ---------------------------------------------
                                   John Ray Rask, Principal Executive Officer



Date:   November 7, 2003            /s/
                                   ---------------------------------------------
                                   John M. Hickey, Principal Financial Officer
<PAGE>   1

               INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

                         HIGH SPEED NET SOLUTIONS, INC.

                      SERIES B CONVERTIBLE PREFERRED STOCK
                           $0.001 PAR VALUE PER SHARE

FULLY PAID AND NON-ASSESSABLE SHARES OF SERIES B CONVERTIBLE PREFERRED STOCK OF
                         High Speed Net Solutions, Inc.


   -----------------------------------       ------------------------------
      SECRETARY/ASSISTANT SECRETARY             PRESIDENT/VICE PRESIDENT


<PAGE>   2

The Corporation is authorized to issue different classes and series of capital
stock. The Corporation will furnish any stockholder without charge, upon request
in writing, a statement of the designations, relative rights, preferences and
limitations determined for each series and the authority of the Board of
Directors to determine variations for future sales.

The securities represented by this certificate have not been registered under
the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the "Act"), or applicable state
securities laws. Accordingly, the securities represented by this certificate may
not be sold, offered for sale, transferred, pledged or hypothecated without an
effective registration statement for such securities under the Act or applicable
state securities laws or an opinion of counsel satisfactory to the Corporation
that the registration is not registered under the Act or any applicable state
securities laws.
Exhibit 13.1



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



This certification is not to be deemed filed
pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and does not constitute a part of the Annual Report of UTStarcom Holdings
Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the period ending December 31, 2014 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on May 19, 2015, as amended by this Amendment No. 1 on Form 20-F/A filed on the date hereof (the “Report”).



In connection with the Report, I, William Wong,
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; 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: June 30, 2015



|By: | /s/ William Wong               | 
|--- | ------------------------------ | 
|    | Name: William Wong             | 
|    | Title: Chief Executive Officer |
ALD
- 138 NOT PRECEDENTIAL
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

___________ No. 24

- 1627

___________ IN RE: RANDAL WISE , Petitioner

____________________________________ On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (Related to Crim. No. 3

- 20

- cr - 00102

- 001 )

____________________________________ Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P. June 13, 2024 Before: HARDIMAN, MONTGOMERY

- REEVES, and NYGAA RD, Circuit Judges (Opinion filed : June 26, 2024 )

_________ OPINION *

_________ PER CURIAM Randal Wise has filed a petition for a writ of mandamus. For the reasons that follow, we will deny the petition. In January 2020, Wise was indicted in the United States Dist rict Court for the District of New Jersey on charges of attempting to entice a minor to engage in sexual

* This disposition is not an opinion of the full Court and pursuant to I.O.P. 5.7 does not constitute binding precedent.2 activity. I n a superseding indictment , charges of transporting child pornography, possessing child pornography, and attempting to transfer obscene mat ter to a minor were added. In March 2022, Wise was found guilty by a jury o n all four counts. He is currently awaiting sentencing

. The writ of mandamus will issue only in extraordinary circumstances. See Sporck v. Peil , 759 F.2d 312, 314 (3d Cir. 1985). As a precondition to the issuance of the writ, Wise must establish that there is no alternative remedy or other adequate means to obtain the desired relief and must demonstrate a clear and indisputable right to the relief sought. Kerr v. U.S. Dist. Cour t , 426 U.S. 394, 403 (1976). A petition for a writ of mandamus is not a substitute for an appeal. See In re Briscoe , 448 F.3d 201, 212 (3d Cir. 2006). In his mandamus petition, Wise asserts that the prosecution and police fabricated evidence against him and requests that we dismiss the case against him. Wise has the alternative remedy of challenging his conviction in his criminal proceedings and filing an appeal at the appropriate time . We note that he has raised similar allegations of fabricated evidence in a counseled motion for a new trial filed in the District Court. That motion is still pending. Because Wise has alternative remedies, mandamus rel ief is not warranted. For the above reasons, we will deny the petition.
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1




                          Independent Auditors' Consent



The Board of Directors
Mexican Restaurants, Inc.:


We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No.
333-2271) on Form S-8 of Mexican Restaurants, Inc. of our report dated March 19,
2004, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of the Mexican Restaurants,
Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 29, 2002 and December 28, 2003 and, the
related consolidated statements of income, stockholders' equity and cash flows
for the each of the years in the three-year period ended December 28, 2003,
which report appears in the December 28, 2003 Annual Report on Form 10-K of
Mexican Restaurants, Inc.

                                                     KPMG LLP

Houston, Texas
March 26, 2004
II

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2192

To suspend temporarily the duty on Cibacron Brilliant Blue FN-G.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MARCH 7, 2000

Mr. EDWARDS (for himself and Mr. HELMS) introduced the following bill;

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To suspend temporarily the duty on Cibacron Brilliant Blue

FN-G.

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

3 SECTION 1. TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OF DUTY ON

4 CIBACRON, BRILLIANT BLUE FN-G.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of

6 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is

7 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following

8 new heading:
2

•S 2192 IS

‘‘ 9902.32.00 Cibacron Brilliant Blue FN-G

(CAS No.

163062–28–0)

(provided for in

subheading

3204.16.30) ....... Free No change No change On or before

12/31/2002 ’’.

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

2 subsection (a) applies to goods entered, or withdrawn from

3 warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day after

4 the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
April 4, 2013

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

REM SERVICES, INC. AND RISE J. MONTRELL, Appellants

NO. 14-12-00724-CV V.

DR. AMER ZAHEER, Appellee

________________________________

This cause, an appeal from the judgments in favor of appellee, Dr. Amer 

Zaheer, signed January 13, 2012 and April 27, 2012, was heard on the transcript of 

the record. We have inspected the record and find no error in the judgment. We 

order the judgment of the court below AFFIRMED.

We order appellants, REM Services, Inc. and Rise J. Montrell, jointly and 

severally, to pay all costs incurred in this appeal. 

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
II

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1687

To amend the Federal Trade Commission Act to authorize appropriations

for the Federal Trade Commission.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

OCTOBER 5, 1999

Mr. MCCAIN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

A BILL

To amend the Federal Trade Commission Act to authorize

appropriations for the Federal Trade Commission.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Federal Trade Com5 mission Reauthorization Act of 1999’’.

6 SEC. 2. REAUTHORIZATION.

7 Section 25 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (15

8 U.S.C. 57c) is amended—

9 (1) by striking ‘‘and not to exceed’’ and insert10 ing ‘‘not to exceed’’; and
2

S 1687 IS

1 (2) by striking ‘‘1998.’’ and inserting the fol2 lowing: ‘‘not to exceed $149,000,000 for fiscal year

3 2001; and not to exceed $156,000,000 for fiscal year

4 2002.’’.

Æ
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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable materials, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Center on Minority Health and Health Disparities Special Emphasis Panel, Faith Based R21.                    

*Date:*                         June 29–July 1, 2010.                    

*Time:*                         5 p.m. to 5 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         Embassy Suites at the Chevy Chase Pavilion, 4300 Military Road, NW., Washington, DC 20015.                    

*Contact Person:*                         Prabha L. Atreya, PhD, Chief, Office of Scientific Review, National Center on Minority Health and Health Disparities, 6707 Democracy Boulevard, Suite 800, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 594–8696,                         *atreyapr@mail.nih.gov.*

Dated: April 30, 2010.

Jennifer Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2010–10889 Filed 5–6–10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140–01–P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>      5
<MULTIPLIER>   1

<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       Mar-31-2001
<PERIOD-START>                          Apr-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                            Sep-30-2000
<CASH>                                      1236231
<SECURITIES>                                      0
<RECEIVABLES>                               2920000
<ALLOWANCES>                                  61776
<INVENTORY>                                 5856797
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           10832379
<PP&E>                                      9573402
<DEPRECIATION>                              5177805
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             15280365
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       1844446
<BONDS>                                           0
<COMMON>                                    2784088
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             0
<PREFERRED>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                  9106878
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               15280365
<SALES>                                     9079095
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            9181651
<CGS>                                       6637202
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               6637202
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             621691
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            70330
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               67327
<INCOME-TAX>                                  17208
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           50119
<DISCONTINUED>                                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   0
<CHANGES>                                         0
<NET-INCOME>                                  50119
<EPS-BASIC>                                   .01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   .01


</TABLE>
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

JIMMI TYLER REBISH,

Petitioner,

v.

MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD,

Respondent.

______________________ 

2014-3087

______________________ 

Petition for review of the Merit Systems Protection 

Board in No. SF-0752-13-0362-I-1.

______________________ 

ON MOTION

______________________ 

O R D E R

The Department of the Interior (“Interior”) moves to 

reform the official caption to name the Merit Systems 

Protection Board (“Board”) as the respondent, and for an 

extension of time for the Board to file its response brief 21 

days from the date of disposition of this motion. 

Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 7703(a)(2), the Board is designated as the respondent when the Board’s decision concerns the procedure or jurisdiction of the Board. The 

Case: 14-3087 Document: 17 Page: 1 Filed: 09/18/2014
2 REBISH v. MSPB

employing agency is designated as the respondent when the 

Board reaches the merits of the underlying case. Here, the 

Board dismissed Jimmi Tyler Rebish’s petition for lack of 

jurisdiction. Thus, the Board is the proper respondent in 

this petition for review.

Accordingly, 

IT IS ORDERED THAT: 

(1) The motion to reform the caption is granted. The 

revised official caption is reflected above. 

(2) The motion for an extension of time to file the response brief is granted to the extent that the Board 

should calculate the due date for its brief from the date of 

filing of this order. 

 FOR THE COURT

 /s/ Daniel E. O’Toole 

Daniel E. O’Toole 

Clerk of Court

s21

Case: 14-3087 Document: 17 Page: 2 Filed: 09/18/2014
Exhibit 23  CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM  We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos. 333-168681, 333-164869 and 333-156459 on Form S-3 and Registration Statement Nos. 333-170588, 333-160049, 333-131431, 333-40838, 333-40846, 333-40868, 333-66390, 333-101201, 333-102039, 333-107628, 333-110847 on Form S-8 of our reports dated June 14, 2011, relating to the consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedule of Capstone Turbine Corporation (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph regarding Capstone Turbine Corporations adoption of the guidance in FASB ASC Topic 815 Derivatives and Hedging, effective April 1, 2009, and the effectiveness of the internal control over financial reporting, of Capstone Turbine Corporation appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Capstone Turbine Corporation for the year ended March 31, 2011.  /s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP  Los Angeles, California June 14, 2011
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 12**  **- 7857** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

– Appellee ,
v. ANTHONY JERMART MIFFIN, a/k/a Ant , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Richmond
. Robert E. Payne, Senior District Judge. ( 3:08

- cr - 00325

- REP

- 4; 3:10

- cv - 00878

- REP )

Submitted : December 13, 2012 Decided: December 19, 2012

Before MOTZ, W YNN, and FLOYD , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
. Anthony Jermart Miffin, Appellant Pro Se. Elizabeth Wu, Assistant United States Attorney, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Anthony Jermart Miffin seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. A. § 2255 ( West Supp. 2012 ) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appea lability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (B) (200 6 ). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (200 6 ). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a pris oner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Sla ck , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Miffin has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal3 contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
IB

House Calendar No. 274

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 1794

[Report No. 106–828]

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 6, 2000

Referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

SEPTEMBER 7, 2000

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

AN ACT

To designate the Federal courthouse at 145 East Simpson

Avenue in Jackson, Wyoming, as the ‘‘Clifford P. Hansen Federal Courthouse’’.

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

3 SECTION 1. DESIGNATION OF CLIFFORD P. HANSEN FED4 ERAL COURTHOUSE.

5 The Federal courthouse at 145 East Simpson Avenue

6 in Jackson, Wyoming, shall be known and designated as

7 the ‘‘Clifford P. Hansen Federal Courthouse’’.
2

•S 1794 RH

1 SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

2 Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document,

3 paper, or other record of the United States to the Federal

4 courthouse referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be

5 a reference to the Clifford P. Hansen Federal Courthouse.

Passed the Senate March 2, 2000.

Attest: GARY SISCO,

Secretary.

House Calendar No. 274

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 1794

[Report No. 106–828]

AN ACT

To designate the Federal courthouse at 145 East

Simpson Avenue in Jackson, Wyoming, as the‘‘Clifford P. Hansen Federal Courthouse’’.

SEPTEMBER 7, 2000

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be

printed
Exhibit 32.2

                           SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended
(the "Act"), and Section (32) of Item 601 of Regulation S-K promulgated under
the Act, each of the undersigned officers of Westbank Corporation (the
"Corporation") does hereby certify to such officer's knowledge that:

     The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2005 of
     the Corporation fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
     15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in
     the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
     condition and results of operations of the Corporation.

Date:    August 5, 2005                    /s/  John M. Lilly
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           John M. Lilly
                                           Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer
#### McKinney, respondent, *v.*Powers, appellant.

PRACTICE — *exceptions to instructions.*Where no exceptions were taken to the instructions of the court on the trial below, and properly saved at the proper time, and in the proper way, they will not be regarded in the appellate court.

*Appeal from Third Disi/riet, Lewis and Qla/rke County.*

Ohumasebo *&*ChadwioK, for appellant.

Shobee *&*Lowey, for respondent.

Wade, C. J.

The alleged errors complained of in this action arise upon the instructions of the court to the jury. The record shows that no exceptions were taken to the instructions as given. “We have repeatedly held that this court will not consider the correctness or incorrectness of instructions to the jury, unless exceptions were properly taken and saved at the proper time. See *Griswold*v. *Boley,*1 Mon. 545.

*467Objections to instructions should be specifically pointed out before the case is finally submitted to the jury. The court below should have an opportunity to correct any alleged errors in the instructions, and this can only be done when such alleged errors are designated, before the case goes to the jury. Obviously, this opportunity was not presented to the court in this case. The instructions went to the jury without objection, and it is now too late to assign errors upon such instructions, no exceptions having been taken at the proper time. Judgment is affirmed.

*Judgment affirmed.*