alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 23

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The
Board of Directors
Ballantyne Strong Inc.:

We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements on Forms S-8 (File Nos. 333-03849, 333-116739,
333-139177, and 333-153408) of Ballantyne Strong, Inc. (formerly Ballantyne of Omaha, Inc.) of our report dated March 16, 2009, except as to Note 27, which is as
of March 27, 2009, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Ballantyne Strong, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2008 and 2007, and the related consolidated statements
of operations, stockholders' equity and comprehensive income (loss), and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2008, and the related financial
statement schedule II, and our report dated March 16, 2009 with respect to the effectiveness of Ballantyne Strong, Inc.'s internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2008, which reports appear in the December 31, 2008 annual report on Form 10-K/A of Ballantyne Strong, Inc.

Our
report dated March 16, 2009, except as to Note 27, which is as of March 27, 2009, on the consolidated balance sheets of Ballantyne Strong, Inc. and subsidiaries
as of December 31, 2008 and 2007, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders' equity and comprehensive income (loss), and cash flows for each of the years in the
three-year period ended December 31, 2008, and the related financial statement schedule II, refers to Ballantyne Strong, Inc.'s
adoption of the fair value method of accounting for stock-based compensation as required by Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123(R),Share-Based
Payment, on January 1, 2006 and the adoption of the recognition and disclosure provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 158, Employer's Accounting for Defined Benefit
Pension and Other Postretirement Plans, as of December 31, 2006.

/s/
KPMG LLP

Omaha,
Nebraska
June 25, 2009

---



QuickLinks
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-6768

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

CLARENCE BERNARD GRAY,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen, Sr.,

District Judge. (CR-94-241, CA-97-453-2)

Submitted: October 8, 1998 Decided: November 30, 1998

Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Clarence Bernard Gray, Appellant Pro Se. Lisa Blue Boggs, Assistant

United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Clarence Bernard Gray seeks to appeal the district court’s

order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994

& Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s

opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district

court. United States v. Gray, No. CR-94-241; CA-97-453-2 (M.D.N.C.

May 8, 1998). 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.

DISMISSED
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5

<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM AVITAR'S
ANNUAL REPORT TO STOCKHOLDERS FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1997 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

       
<S>                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>            SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                OCT-1-1996
<PERIOD-END>                 JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                            58,989
<SECURITIES>                           0
<RECEIVABLES>                    395,412
<ALLOWANCES>                       9,040
<INVENTORY>                      136,325
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                 678,216
<PP&E>                           330,038
<DEPRECIATION>                         0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                 5,442,436
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>          1,949,248
<BONDS>                                0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                  0
<PREFERRED>                        6,572
<COMMON>                         135,264
<OTHER-SE>                     3,198,385
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>   5,442,436
<SALES>                        1,615,388
<TOTAL-REVENUES>               1,615,388
<CGS>                          1,681,005
<TOTAL-COSTS>                  4,247,822
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                80,785
<INCOME-PRETAX>               (2,705,871)
<INCOME-TAX>                       9,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>           (2,714,871)
<DISCONTINUED>                         0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                        0
<CHANGES>                              0
<NET-INCOME>                  (2,714,871)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                       (.27)
<EPS-DILUTED>                       (.27)
        


</TABLE>
* 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. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED April 21, 2004 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-50889 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus BRENT HUGHES, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. SA-03-CR-52

-------------------- Before JOLLY, JONES, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Brent Hughes appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction of sexual abuse of a minor in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2243(a). Hughes argues that under the reasoning of Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466 (2000), a fact must be alleged in the indictment before it may be used to increase the maximum guideline sentence. Hughes acknowledges that his contention is foreclosed by this court’s decision in UnitedNo. 03-50889 -2- States v. Randle , 304 F.3d 373 (5th Cir. 2002), but he seeks to preserve his argument for possible further review. The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of filing an appellee’s brief. In its motion, the Government asks that an appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is GRANTED. The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
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 of Avitar,  Inc.  (the  "Company") on
Form10-QSB/A  for the  period  ending  December  31,  2004  as  filed  with  the
Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Peter
P. Phildius,  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, to my knowledge, that:


     (1) The Report  fully  complies  with the  requirements  of  Section  13(a)
or15(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.


Date: February 10, 2006


                                             /s/ Peter P. Phildius
                                             ---------------------
                                             Peter P. Phildius Chief
                                             Executive Officer
# C_2014388EN.01003002.xml

| 3.11.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 388/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.11.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 388/30

---

Action brought on 7 August 2014 — ZZ v Commission

(Case F-76/14)

2014/C 388/38

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: G. Suárez de Castro and M. Orman, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the decision not to include the applicant on the reserve list for competition EPSO/AD/248/13.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Since there is a place on the reserve list for competition EPSO/AD/248/13 to constitute a reserve from which to recruit administrators in Field 1 (‘Security of Buildings’) and since the applicant was awarded a mark of 53,38, which is higher than the minimum mark set by EPSO of 51,01, include the applicant on the reserve list for that competition; |
| --- | --- |

—

Since there is a place on the reserve list for competition EPSO/AD/248/13 to constitute a reserve from which to recruit administrators in Field 1 (‘Security of Buildings’) and since the applicant was awarded a mark of 53,38, which is higher than the minimum mark set by EPSO of 51,01, include the applicant on the reserve list for that competition;

| — | Alternatively, in the light of the many irregularities in the marking of test (d), annul the marking of test (d) and re-rank the candidates in the competition on the basis of the other marks awarded, which were not vitiated by irregularities; |
| --- | --- |

—

Alternatively, in the light of the many irregularities in the marking of test (d), annul the marking of test (d) and re-rank the candidates in the competition on the basis of the other marks awarded, which were not vitiated by irregularities;

| — | If the application is upheld, order the applicant to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

If the application is upheld, order the applicant to pay the costs.

---
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

                            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 Annual Report of Evergreen Solar, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Mark A. Farber, 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 to
my knowledge:

(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.

/s/ Mark A. Farber
-------------------------------
Mark A. Farber
Chief Executive Officer
March 27, 2003


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Evergreen Solar, Inc. and will be retained by Evergreen Solar, Inc.
and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
SERVED: FEBRUARY 4, 2014 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

IN THE MATTER OF 

SOLUTIONS AIR CHARTER, LLC I 

FAA DOCKET NO. [TO BE ASSIGNED] 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

FDMS NO. FAA- 2013-0854 

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT OF PROCEEDING 

This proceeding (heretofore designated as Case No. 2011SW910191) has been assigned 

to Administrative Law Judge J.E. Sullivan. All future pleadings and other communications 

regarding this proceeding shall be served on the Judge, the FAA Hearing Docket, and the other 

persons on the attached Service List. 

Ronnie A. 

Chief Administrative Law J 

Attachment - Service List 
SERVICE LIST- BY U.S. MAIL 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Feder Aviation Administration 

800 I dependence Avenue, S.W. 

Wash ngton, DC 20591 

Atten ion: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1 000

1 

J. C. uehler, Director of Operations 

Solu ons Air Charter, LLC, Respondent 

Indi apolis Executive Airport 

1132 East State Road 32 

Zion ville, IN 46077 

TEL 317"769-2538/317-769-4487 

F : 317-769-3207 

J.C. uehler, Respondent's Counsel 

Bue ler Associates, Attorneys 

777 ast-86th Street 

:Sox 40924 

Indi apolis, IN 46240-0924 

TE : 317-253-8686 

F : 317-253-9371 

ONE COPY 

Nic olas R. Milliard, Complainant's Counsel 

En£ rcement Division, AGC-300 

0 ce of the Chief Counsel 

Fed ral Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Wa hington, DC 20591 

TE : 202-267-3452 

F : 202-267-5106 

Ho . J .E. Sullivan, Administrative Law Judge 

Of tee of Hearings, M-20 

U. . Department of Transportation 

12 0 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) 

W shington, DC 20590 

T L: 202-366-2132 

F : 202-366-7536 

FDMS No. FAA-201~-0854 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal 

A 'ation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl000, Washington, 

D 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430. 

-2-
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

TOMMIE L. GOODWIN
, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA
, Appellee

.

No. 4D 18

- 1013

[ July 25, 2019 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County ; Ernest A. Kollra , Judge; L.T. Case No. 17

- 14498 CF10A

.

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Paul Edward Petillo, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and MaryEllen M. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

G ROSS

, M AY
, JJ., and N UTT

, J AMES , Associate Judge, concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
EXHIBIT 32
----------




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



      The following statement is provided by the undersigned to accompany
the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2005,
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be
deemed filed pursuant to any provision of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 or any other securities law:

      Each of the undersigned certifies that the foregoing Report on
Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m) and that the information
contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of ARVIDA/JMB PARTNERS, L.P.




                                       /s/  Gary Nickele
                                       ------------------------------
                                       Gary Nickele
                                       Chief Executive Officer




                                       /s/  Gailen J. Hull
                                       ------------------------------
                                       Gailen J. Hull
                                       Chief Financial Officer and
                                       Principal Accounting Officer
118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 764 

AN ACT 

To require the Secretary of the Interior to reissue regulations 

removing the gray wolf from the list of endangered and 

threatened wildlife under the Endangered Species Act 

of 1973. 

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

•HR 764 EH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Trust the Science 

3 Act’’. 

4 SEC. 2. REMOVING THE GRAY WOLF FROM THE LIST OF EN5 DANGERED AND THREATENED WILDLIFE. 

6 Not later than 60 days after the date of enactment 

7 of this section, the Secretary of the Interior shall reissue 

8 the final rule entitled ‘‘Endangered and Threatened Wild9 life and Plants; Removing the Gray Wolf (Canis lupus) 

10 From the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife’’ 

11 and published on November 3, 2020 (85 Fed. Reg. 

12 69778). 

13 SEC. 3. NO JUDICIAL REVIEW. 

14 Reissuance of the final rule under section 2 shall not 

15 be subject to judicial review. 

Passed the House of Representatives April 30, 2024. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 764 

AN ACT 

To require the Secretary of the Interior to reissue 

Endangered Species Act of 1973. of endangered and threatened wildlife under the regulations removing the gray wolf from the list
# C_2016392EN.01003101.xml

| 24.10.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 392/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.10.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 392/31

---

Judgment of the General Court of 9 September 2016 — Farahat v Council

(Case T-830/14) (1)

1

((Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken against Syria - Freezing of funds - Error of assessment))

(2016/C 392/38)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Mohamed Farahat (Cairo, Egypt) (represented by: B. Kennelly, Barrister, P. Saini QC, and N. Sheikh, Solicitor)

Applicant:

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: B. Driessen and A. Vitro, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action under Article 263 TFEU for the annulment of Council Implementing Decision 2014/730/CFSP of 20 October 2014 implementing Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2014 L 301, p. 36) and of Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1105/2014 of 20 October 2014 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria (OJ 2014 L 301, p. 7), in so far as those measures concern the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls Council Implementing Decision No 2014/730/CFSP of 20 October 2014 implementing Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1105/2014 of 20 October 2014 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria in so far as they apply to Mohamed Farahat; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls Council Implementing Decision No 2014/730/CFSP of 20 October 2014 implementing Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1105/2014 of 20 October 2014 implementing Regulation (EU) No 36/2012 concerning restrictive measures in view of the situation in Syria in so far as they apply to Mohamed Farahat;

| 2. | Orders the Council of the European Union to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by Mr Farahat. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Council of the European Union to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by Mr Farahat.

---

(1)  OJ C 96, 23.3.2015.

1

---
# C_2016441EN.01001701.xml

| 28.11.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 441/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.11.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 441/17

---

Judgment of the General Court of 18 October 2016 — Eveready Battery Company v EUIPO — Hussain and Others (POWER EDGE)

(Case T-824/14) (1)

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark POWER EDGE - Earlier EU word mark EDGE - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Genuine use of the earlier mark - Article 15(1) and 42(2) of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2016/C 441/21)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Eveready Battery Company, Inc. (Saint-Louis, Missouri, United States) (represented by: N. Hebeis, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Garrido Otaola and M. Fischer, acting as Agents)

Other parties to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervening before the General Court: Imran Hussain, Rizwana Hussain, Maariah Hussain, Danyaal Hussain and Zahra Hussain (Leeds, United Kingdom) (represented by: S. Malynicz, QC)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 6 October 2014 (Case R 38/2014-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Eveready Battery Company and the Hussains.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Eveready Battery Company, Inc. to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Eveready Battery Company, Inc. to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 65, 23.2.2015.

---
# C_2015007EN.01004802.xml

| 12.1.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 7/48 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.1.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 7/48

---

Action brought on 12 September 2014 — ZZ v OHIM

(Case F-93/14)

(2015/C 007/56)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: S. Pappas, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: OHIM

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

The Annulment of the decision of OHIM, drafted on the grounds of the decision of the president of the Office of 29th March 2012 concerning teleworking, not to authorise the applicant to telework in Barcelona, and thus, obliging her to return to Alicante.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the contested decision;

| — | order the Defendant to bear the costs of the current proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Defendant to bear the costs of the current proceedings.

---
§ 861.30 Development of standards. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), while engaged in the development of a proposed standard under this section will: ( a ) Support its proposed performance standard by such test data or other documents or materials as may reasonably be required;
( b ) Provide interested persons an opportunity to participate in the development of the standard by accepting comments and, where appropriate, holding public meetings on issues relating to development of the standard. Notice of the opportunity to participate in the development of the standard will be furnished in a manner reasonably calculated to reach the majority of persons interested in the development of the standard. This requirement shall be satisfied by publishing such a notice in the Federal Register. Whenever it is appropriate, FDA will use the Federal Register to make announcements about the standard development process of standard developers other than Federal agencies.
( c ) Maintain records disclosing the course of development of the proposed standard, the comments and other information submitted by a person in connection with such development (including comments and information regarding the need for a standard), and such other information as may be required to evaluate the standard.
[45 FR 7484, Feb. 1, 1980, as amended at 57 FR 58405, Dec. 10, 1992]