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



CERTIFICATION OF

CHIEF EXECUTIVE
OFFICER

AND

CHIEF
FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Richard J. Heckmann, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of K2 Inc.,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report on Form 10-K of K2 Inc. for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of K2 Inc



|                     |  |  |  |  |  |                            |  |                                                         
|-------------------- |  |  |  |  |  | -------------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------------------
|                     |  |  |  | 
|                     |  |  | 
|Date: March 12, 2004 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/    RICHARD J.
HECKMANN
|                     |  |  |  |  |  |                            |  | Richard J. Heckmann Chairman and Chief Executive Officer



I, John J. Rangel,
Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of K2 Inc., certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report on Form 10-K of K2 Inc. for the fiscal year ended
December 31, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of K2 Inc.



|                     |  |  |  |  |  |                       |  |                                                                 
|-------------------- |  |  |  |  |  | --------------------- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------
|                     |  |  |  | 
|                     |  |  | 
|Date: March 12, 2004 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/    JOHN J.
RANGEL
|                     |  |  |  |  |  |                       |  | John J. Rangel Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
#### The State ex rel. Tran, Appellant, *v.*McGrath, Judge, et al., Appellees.

[Cite as *State ex rel. Tran v. McGrath*(1997), 78 Ohio St.3d 45.]

*46(No. 96-2601

Submitted January 21, 1997

Decided March 19, 1997.)

*Quang Ly Tran, pro se.*

*Ronald J. O’Brien,*Franklin County Prosecuting Attorney, and *Bonnie L. Maxton,*Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellees.

*Per Curiam.*

Tran asserts that the court of appeals erred and that he should either be released or that his criminal case should be transferred to Richland County. Tran does not contend that the court of appeals erred in failing to grant a writ of mandamus to compel the appointment of a special prosecutor. Tran also no longer claims entitlement to a writ of procedendo to compel appellees to rule on his postconviction relief petition and alternative motion to withdraw his guilty plea because appellees have now denied the petition and motion. Further, although Tran now requests release from prison, he did not request such relief in his petition in the court of appeals. Therefore, we limit our consideration on appeal to Tran’s claim for a writ of mandamus to compel appellees to transfer his criminal case to Richland County.

Tran asserts that he is entitled to a writ of mandamus compelling the transfer of his criminal case because fraud and trickery by the prosecution led him to plead guilty to an offense which did not occur in Franklin County.

*47But where a plain and adequate remedy at law has been unsuccessfully invoked, a writ of mandamus will not lie to relitigate the same issue. *State ex rel. Zimmerman v. Tompkins*(1996), 75 Ohio St.3d 447, 449, 663 N.E.2d 639, 641; *State ex rel. Nichols v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Mental Retardation & Dev. Disabilities*(1995), 72 Ohio St.3d 205, 209, 648 N.E.2d 823, 827. Tran concedes on appeal that he has unsuccessfully invoked several alternative remedies, including his petition for postconviction relief and motion to withdraw his guilty plea, to raise the alleged fraud and trickery. These alternative remedies constituted adequate legal remedies in which Tran raised the same issues he attempts to relitigate via mandamus. See, also, *State ex rel. Seikbert v. Wilkinson*(1994), 69 Ohio St.3d 489, 491, 633 N.E.2d 1128, 1130 (motion to withdraw guilty plea constituted adequate legal remedy to raise claimed breach of plea agreement and thus precluded extraordinary relief in mandamus). Tran’s allegations did not attack the jurisdiction of his sentencing court, and he thus possessed adequate legal remedies that precluded extraordinary relief. See, *e.g., State ex rel. Tran v. McMackin*(1991), 62 Ohio St.3d 165, 166, 580 N.E.2d 782.

Based on the foregoing, the court of appeals properly denied the requested writ of mandamus. Accordingly, the judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed.

*Judgment affirmed.*

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 32(n)

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





|(1) | The Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2007 (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 as of the dates and for the periods presented in the Report.







|/s/ Wanda C. CurryWanda C. Curry
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
of System Energy Resources, Inc.
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:	February 28, 2008
Exhibit 12(g)

                 Entergy London Investments
Computation of Ratios of Earnings to Fixed Charges and
           Ratios of Earnings to Fixed Charges
                                                 
                                                        
                                                        
                                                         1997
                                                               
Fixed charges, as defined:                                     
  Total Interest                                        178,647
  Interest applicable to rentals                          3,766
                                                      ---------         
Total fixed charges, as defined                        $182,413
                                                      =========         
Earnings as defined:                                           
  Net Income                                          ($148,856)
  Add:                                                         
    Provision for income taxes:                                
      Total                                             (55,536)
    Fixed charges as above                              182,413
                                                      ---------         
Total earnings, as defined                             ($21,979)
                                                      =========         
Ratio of earnings to fixed charges, as defined            -0.12
                                                      =========
EXHIBIT 23



CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS



We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-8 dated October 14, 1988,
Form S-8 dated December 28, 1994 and Form S-8 dated May 7, 2002) pertaining to the 1988 Incentive Stock Option Plan, 1994 Incentive Stock Option Plan, and 1999 Stock Option Plan, respectively, of K2 Inc. of our report dated February 20, 2003, except
for Notes 7 and Note 16, as to which the date is March 26, 2003, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of K2 Inc. included in the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002. We also consent to the incorporation
by reference in the Registration Statement (Form S-4 dated August 9, 1999) of K2 Inc. and in the related Proxy Statement of our report dated February 20, 2003, except for Note 7 and Note 16 as to which the date is March 26, 2003, with respect to the
consolidated financial statements of K2 Inc. included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002.



Our audits also include the financial statement schedule of K2 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.



LOGO



Los Angeles, California

March 27, 2003
96-2800.

#### State v. Ledbetter.

Greene App. No. 95CA04. Reported at 78 Ohio St.3d 1421, 676 N.E.2d 124. On motion for reconsideration. Motion denied.
97-551.

#### Ross v. Farmers Ins. Group of Cos.

Montgomery App. No. 15865. On review of order certifying a conflict. The court determines that a conflict exists; the parties are to brief the following question certified by the court of appeals at page 3 of its Decision and Entry filed March 11,1997;

> “When does a cause of action for underinsured motorist coverage accrue so as to determine the law applicable to such a claim?” [The conflict cases are *Brocwell v. King*(Oct. 24, 1995), Richland App. No. 95-25, unreported, 1995 WL 768520, discretionary appeal denied (1996), 75 Ohio St.3d 1219, 665 N.E.2d 217, and *Heritage Mut. Ins. Co. v. McBee*(Aug. 21, 1996), Summit App. No. 17440, unreported, 1996 WL 470652.]

Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., dissent.
Exhibit 32

SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATIONS

We, Lei Gu, Chief Executive Officer and Anthony K. Chan, Chief Financial Officer, of Zoom Technologies, Inc.,
a Delaware corporation (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, that to the best of our knowledge:

1. the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended March 31, 2011 (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.

Date: May 16, 2011

/s/ Lei Gu            
Lei Gu
Chief Executive Officer
and/s/ Anthony K. Chan
Anthony K. Chan
Chief Financial Officer

The material contained in Exhibit 32.0 is not deemed "filed" with the SEC and is not to be incorporated by
reference into any filing of the Registrant under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
whether made before or after the date hereof and irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such
filing.

---
* The Honorable Warren K. Urbom, United States District Judge for the District of Nebraska. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 01-3137

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the District v. * of Nebraska. * Ricardo Valencia Ibarra, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellant. *

___________ Submitted: December 21, 2001 Filed: January 8, 2002

___________ Before HANSEN, FAGG, and BEAM, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Ricardo Valencia Ibarra appeals the sentence imposed by the district court * after Ibarra pleaded guilty to a methamphetamine-distribution offense. Ibarra argues the district court committed error by denying a minor-participant reduction, see U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2(b). We disagree. The district court did not commit clear error because Ibarra–who declined to offer any evidence at sentencing–failed to prove his entitlement to the role reduction. See United States v. Correa , 167 F.3d 414, 416 (8th-2- Cir. 1999) (standard of review; defendant bears burden to prove he warrants role reduction); United States v. Lucht , 18 F.3d 541, 556 (8th Cir.) (determination of defendant's role in offense is to be made on basis of all relevant conduct and not solely on act cited in count of conviction), cert. denied , 513 U.S. 949 (1994). Accordingly, we affirm the district court. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> UT
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Entergy
Corporation's financial statements for the year ended December 31, 1998 and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000065984
<NAME> ENTERGY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
<SUBSIDIARY>
   <NUMBER> 023
   <NAME> ENTERGY CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                   15,328,582
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                  1,488,280
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                       3,655,277
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                     2,375,884
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              22,848,023
<COMMON>                                         2,468
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                    4,630,609
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                          2,526,888
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>               7,159,956
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          382,523
<PREFERRED>                                    488,455
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                         6,596,617
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                             296,790
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                       0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                  255,221
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                    220,209
<LEASES-CURRENT>                               176,270
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>               7,271,982
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>               22,848,023
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                   11,494,772
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                           266,735
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                   9,982,917
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                   9,982,917
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                      1,511,855
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                             373,024
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>               1,884,879
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                       832,515
<NET-INCOME>                                   785,629
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                     46,560
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                  739,069
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                       373,441
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                      842,269
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                       1,679,057
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    $3.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    $3.00
        


</TABLE>
II 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3248 

To designate the Department of the Interior Building in Washington, District 

of Columbia, as the ‘‘Stewart Lee Udall Department of the Interior Building’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 22, 2010 

Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself, Mr. UDALL of Colorado, Mr. MCCAIN, and Mr. 

REID) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Environment and Public Works 

A BILL 

To designate the Department of the Interior Building in 

Washington, District of Columbia, as the ‘‘Stewart Lee 

Udall Department of the Interior Building’’. 

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 THE STEWART LEE UDALL 

4 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR BUILDING. 

5 The Department of the Interior Building located at 

6 1849 C Street, Northwest, in Washington, District of Co7 lumbia, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Stewart 

8 Lee Udall Department of the Interior Building’’. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 3248 IS

1 SEC. 2. REFERENCES TO THE BUILDING. 

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

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

4 described in section 1 shall be considered to be a reference 

5 to the ‘‘Stewart Lee Udall Department of the Interior 

6 Building’’. 

Æ 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3140 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3140

   To grant the Secretary of Health and Human Services authority to 
design, construct, and operate facilities for the purpose of developing 
 and producing biological products in order to meet critical national 
     needs for such biological products, in response to potential 
         bioterrorist attacks or naturally occurring pathogens.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 18, 2010

Mr. Specter (for himself and Mr. Casey) introduced the following bill; 
     which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, 
                     Education, Labor, and Pensions

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To grant the Secretary of Health and Human Services authority to 
design, construct, and operate facilities for the purpose of developing 
 and producing biological products in order to meet critical national 
     needs for such biological products, in response to potential 
         bioterrorist attacks or naturally occurring pathogens.

    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 ``Biosecurity and Vaccine Development 
Improvement Act of 2010''.

SEC. 2. DEVELOPMENT AND PRODUCTION OF BIOLOGICAL PRODUCTS.

    Subpart 1 of part F of title III of the Public Health Service Act 
(42 U.S.C. 262 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

``SEC. 352A. DEVELOPMENT AND PRODUCTION OF BIOLOGICAL PRODUCTS.

    ``(a) In General.--The Secretary may design, construct, and operate 
one or more facilities for the purpose of developing and producing 
biological products to meet critical national needs for such biological 
products, in response to potential bioterrorist attacks or to naturally 
occurring pathogens, for which the Secretary determines that private 
industry has not devoted adequate development effort, or has not 
produced adequate stocks of, such needed biological products.
    ``(b) Competitive Award.--In carrying out the authority described 
in subsection (a), the Secretary--
            ``(1) shall ensure that there is competition and may 
        establish a public-private partnership to design, construct, 
        own, and operate a facility described in subsection (a); and
            ``(2) may use the authority to enter into other 
        transactions under section 319L to establish such a 
        facility.''.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 329 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 329

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the nonbusiness 
   energy property credit for property placed in service during 2008.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 26, 2009

   Mr. Leahy introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the nonbusiness 
   energy property credit for property placed in service during 2008.

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

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF NONBUSINESS ENERGY PROPERTY CREDIT FOR PROPERTY 
              PLACED IN SERVICE DURING 2008.

    (a) In General.--Subsection (g) of section 25C of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 is amended to read as follows:
    ``(g) Termination.--This section shall not apply with respect to 
any property placed in service after December 31, 2009.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
to property placed in service after December 31, 2007.
                                 <all>
```