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


                    Consent of Independent Public Accountants
                    -----------------------------------------


        As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the
   incorporation by reference of our reports dated February 6, 1997, included
   in or incorporated by reference into Thermedics Inc.'s Annual Report on
   Form 10-K for the year ended December 28, 1996, into the Company's
   previously filed Registration Statement No. 2-93746 on Form S-8,
   Registration Statement No. 33-00183 on Form S-8, Registration Statement No.
   2-93747 on Form S-8, Registration Statement No. 33-8992 on Form S-8,
   Registration Statement No. 33-31621 on Form S-8, Registration Statement No.
   33-9215 on Form S-8, Registration Statement No. 33-43707 on Form S-3,
   Registration Statement No. 33-40866 on Form S-3, Registration Statement No.
   33-64070 on Form S-8, Registration Statement No. 33-86972 on Form S-8,
   Registration Statement No. 33-86974 on Form S-8, Registration Statement No.
   033-65279 on Form S-8, and Registration Statement No. 033-61435 on Form
   S-8.



                                           Arthur Andersen LLP



   Boston, Massachusetts
   March 14, 1997
#### In the Matter of Frank Rondon, Appellant, v Donald Selsky, as Director of the Special Housing Unit and Inmate Disciplinary Program for the Department of Correctional Services, Respondent.

[700 NYS2d 239]

—Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Teresi, J.), entered October 23, 1998 in Albany County, which dismissed petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to review a determination of the Commissioner of Correctional Services finding petitioner guilty of violating certain prison disciplinary rules.

The Attorney General has advised this Court by letter that the determination at issue in this proceeding has been administratively reversed and that all references thereto will be expunged from petitioner’s institutional record. Inasmuch as petitioner has received all the relief to which he is entitled, the matter is dismissed as moot *(see, Matter of Witherspoon v Goord,*243 AD2d 931).

Mikoll, J. P., Crew III, Peters, Spain and Mugglin, JJ., concur. Ordered that the petition is dismissed, as moot, without costs.
In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS 

No. 19-1670V 

UNPUBLISHED 

ASHLEY WIRGES, 

 Petitioner, 

v. 

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND 

HUMAN SERVICES, 

 Respondent. 

Chief Special Master Corcoran 

Filed: May 10, 2021 

Special Processing Unit (SPU); 

Ruling on Entitlement; Concession; 

Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; 

Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine 

Administration (SIRVA) 

   

Leah VaSahnja Durant, Law Offices of Leah V. Durant, PLLC, Washington, DC, for 

Petitioner. 

Ronalda Elnetta Kosh, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent. 

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

 On October 29, 2019, Ashley Wirges filed a petition for compensation under the 

National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.2 (the 

“Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine 

administration (“SIRVA”) as a result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine intramuscularly 

administered in her left shoulder on October 19, 2018. Petition at 1. The case was 

assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters. 

On May 10, 2021, Respondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he concedes that 

Petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report at 1. 

Specifically, Respondent states that Petitioner “has satisfied the criteria set forth in the 

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required 

to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in accordance with the E-Government Act 

of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of Electronic Government 

Services). This means the ruling will be available to anyone with access to the internet. In accordance 

with Vaccine Rule 18(b), Petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to redact medical or other information, 

the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, I agree that 

the identified material fits within this definition, I will redact such material from public access. 

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for ease 

of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa 

(2012). 
2

Vaccine Injury Table (Table) and the Qualifications and Aids to Interpretation, which 

affords petitioner the presumption of causation because petitioner had no history of pain, 

inflammation, or dysfunction in her left shoulder; her pain occurred within 48 hours of 

receipt of an intramuscular vaccination; her pain and reduced range of motion were 

limited to the shoulder in which the vaccine was administered; and no other condition or 

abnormality was identified to explain her symptoms.” Id. at 3-4. 

 In view of Respondent’s position and the evidence of record, I find that 

Petitioner is entitled to compensation. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 s/Brian H. Corcoran 

 Brian H. Corcoran 

 Chief Special Master
Before the Second Division,

May 31, 1951

No. 55615.

#### Soeldner-Heyman Co. *v.*United States,

petitions 6803-R and 6807-R (New York).

Opinion by

Ford, J.

It appeared from the record that when the involved merchandise arrived in the United States a question arose between the petitioner and the customs officials as to whether the merchandise should be entered at the foreign value or at the United States value, and that this caused the customs officials to institute a foreign investigation. In the conduct of this investigation, the petitioner was at all times very cooperative and furnished the customs officials with all the information received by it as soon as same came into petitioner’s possession. It was held that there was no intention to defraud the revenue of the United States or to conceal or misrepresent the facts of the case or to deceive the appraiser as to the value of the merchandise. The petitions were therefore granted.
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 13

- 00234

- CV

AMERICAN GENERAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY v. JUAN J. MANCILLAS, M. D., ET AL
On Appeal from the 332nd District Court of Hidalgo County , Texas Trial Cause No. C

- 478

- 11

- F

JUDGMENT THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on appeal, concludes the judgment of the trial court should be reversed and rendered . The Court orders the judgment of the trial court REVERSED and RENDERS judgment that American General's motion for summary judgment be granted . Costs of the appeal are adjudged against appell ee

. We further order this decision certified below for observance. November 20, 2014
No. 65826.

#### Latama Cutlery, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 60/29083 (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, C.J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of miniature knives similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 60247, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

**AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

**PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

In connection with the accompanying quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Futomic Industries, Inc. for the quarter ending March 31, 2006, I, Francisco Schipperheijn, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Futomic Industries, Inc. hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that: 

 

1.     Such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2006, 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2006, fairly represents in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Futomic Industries, Inc. 

 
| Dated: May 19, 2006 |
|---------------------|

 

**FUTOMIC INDUSTRIES, INC.**

 
| By: | */s/ Francisco Schipperheijn* |
|-----|-------------------------------|

Chief Executive Officer and

Chief Financial Officer
From: <Alicea.Jezebele@epamail.epa.gov>

To: steam_record <steam_record@erg.com>, <Jordan.Ronald@epamail.epa.gov>

Date: 9/16/2010 10:28 AM

Subject: Fw: Extension Request - Steam Electric Power Generating Effluent Guidelines 

Questionnaire

----- Forwarded by Jezebele Alicea/DC/USEPA/US on 09/16/2010 10:27 AM

-----

 

 From: "Wagner, Julie" <wagnerj@ci.hamilton.oh.us> 

 To: Jezebele Alicea/DC/USEPA/US@EPA 

 Cc: "Scobee, Albert" <scobeea@ci.hamilton.oh.us> 

 Date: 09/16/2010 09:59 AM 

 Subject: Extension Request - Steam Electric Power Generating Effluent Guidelines Questionnaire 

Extension Request - Steam Electric Power Generating Effluent Guidelines

Questionnaire

Plant ID: 01258

City of Hamilton Municipal Power Plant

Dear Ms. Alicea:

Per my voicemail message yesterday (09/15/10) and our discussion this

morning, the City of Hamilton Municipal Power Plant (Plant ID 01258)

respectfully submits this extension request for submittal of the “U.S.

EPA Questionnaire for the Steam Electric Power Generating Effluent

Guidelines”.

We are making this request based on the unanticipated system failure of

the City’s Internal Database Management System (City of Hamilton

Intranet) which contains much of the City’s and Power Plant’s historical

operational and financial information required in multiple parts of the

Questionnaire. The system went down on September 2, 2010 and was unable

to be brought back online until yesterday, September 15, 2010 due to

technical/IT difficulties. During this period, we did not have access

to the information needed to complete a number of questions.

We received the Questionnaire package on June 21, 2010. Therefore, our

original due date is September 19, 2010 (90 days after receipt of the

letter).

With U.S. EPA’s approval, we would like to request a one week extension

to submit the Questionnaire, with a submittal date of Friday, September

24, 2010.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter and please feel free to

contact me via email or by phone (513-509-3272) or Al Scobee, the Power

Plant Superintendent, at 513-785-7461 if you have any further questions

or require additional information.

Regards,

Julie Wagner
Exhibit 32.1



AMTECH SYSTEMS, INC. AND ITS SUBSIDIARIES



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 Amtech Systems, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ended September 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Jong S. Whang, President and Chief Executive 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.



|      |  |                                      
|----- |  | -------------------------------------
|By    |  | /s/ Jong S. Whang                    
|      |  | Jong S. Whang                        
|      |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
|      | 
|Date: |  | October 18, 2005
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-13-00364-CV

In re eDist Business, LLC

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM TRAVIS COUNTY

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Relator has filed a motion to dismissits petition for writ of mandamus and states that

all matters involved in the underlying dispute have been resolved. Relator further certifies that it has

conferred with real party in interest Recorders.com, Inc., and that the real party in interest does not

oppose this motion. We grant relator’s motion and dismiss the petition for writ of mandamus.

Cf. Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(1) (pertaining to dismissal of appeal).

__________________________________________

Melissa Goodwin, Justice

Before Justices Puryear, Rose, and Goodwin

Dismissed on Relator’s Motion

Filed: July 3, 2013
#### John B. Ennis v. Andrew J. Grimes.

No. 16,048.

Service by *Publication*— Affidavit—Notice—Petition. An affidavit for service by publication, the publication notice and the petition held sufficient against a collateral attack.

Error from Logan district court; Jacob C. Ruppen-THAL, judge.

Opinion filed June 5, 1909.

Affirmed.

*John B. Ennis, pro se.*

*Lee Monroe,*and *George A. Kline,*for the defendant in error.

*Per Curiam:*

The foreclosure judgment interposed as a defense to the action is good against the collateral attack here made upon it. The affidavit for publication service did not need to describe the land. *(Sharpe v. McColm,*79 Kan. 772.) Inferentially, at least, non-residence negatived a usual place of residence in this state where summons might be served, and personal absence from the state precluded personal delivery of summons. This is sufficient against collateral attack. *(Harris v. Claflin,*36 Kan. 543; *Morris v. Sadler,*74 Kan. 892.) The publication notice contained everything specified in the statute. The matter which it is claimed was omitted from the notice is not one of the statutory specifications. The objections made to the petition would not have furnished serious ground for a motion to make more definite and certain. Very clearly the petition was not a complete nullity, as it must be to render the judgment a nullity. It is not necessary to consider other defenses.

The judgment of the district court is affirmed.
No. 74-5906.

#### Brogan *v.*Weinberger, Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare.

C. A. 10th Cir. Certiorari denied.
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h Marilyn Kell y Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y Mary Beth Kell y Brian K. Zahra,

J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk October 24, 2011

y1017 

# Order

October 24, 2011

143361

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 143361 COA: 303561 Saginaw CC: 10-033850-FC JONATHAN JOEADAM LOUIS, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, th e application for leave to ap peal the May 19, 2011 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
No. 96-8003.

#### Ballistrea *v.*United States.

C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Michael B. Collier, Appellant.

(Appeal No. 3.)

[614 NYS2d 356]

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Same Memorandum as in *People v Collier*(204 AD2d 1064 [decided herewith]). (Appeal from Judgment of Genesee County Court, Morton, J. —Escape, 2nd Degree.) Present—Pine, J. P., Balio, Fallon, Wesley and Davis, JJ.
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report of USIP.Com, Inc., (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for theperiod ending September 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Kathy Christopher, Controllerof the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1.             The Report fully complies with the requirements ofSection 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 aspects, the financial condition and results of operations ofthe Company.

 
| Date: November 11, 2004        |
|--------------------------------|
|                           |
|                           |
| /s/ Kathy Christopher          |   |
| Kathy Christopher,  Controller |

 

USIP.Com, Inc. does nothave a “Chief Financial Officer,” Kathy Christopher is the principal financialand accounting officer.

 

----
No. 46532.

#### Protests 800464-G, etc., of W. R. Grace & Co. et al. (Boston, etc.).

*310Opinion by

Cline, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
# C_2013156EN.01002001.xml

| 1.6.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 156/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.6.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 156/20

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato (Italy) lodged on 8 March 2013 — ASL n. 5 ‘Spezzino’ and Others v San Lorenzo Società Cooperativa Sociale, Croce Verde Cogema Cooperativa Sociale Onlus

(Case C-113/13)

2013/C 156/31

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Referring court

Consiglio di Stato

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellants: ASL n. 5 «Spezzino», A.N.P.A.S. Associazione Nazionale Pubblica Assistenza — Comitato Regionale Liguria, Regione Liguria

Appellants:

Respondents: San Lorenzo Società Cooperativa Sociale, Croce Verde Cogema Cooperativa Sociale Onlus

Respondents:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Do Articles 49 TFEU, 56 TFEU, 105 TFEU and 106 TFEU preclude a provision of national law under which ambulance services are awarded, on a preferential basis, to voluntary associations, the Italian Red Cross and other authorised public institutions or bodies, albeit pursuant to agreements which provide only for reimbursement of expenditure that is actually incurred? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Do Articles 49 TFEU, 56 TFEU, 105 TFEU and 106 TFEU preclude a provision of national law under which ambulance services are awarded, on a preferential basis, to voluntary associations, the Italian Red Cross and other authorised public institutions or bodies, albeit pursuant to agreements which provide only for reimbursement of expenditure that is actually incurred?

| 2. | Does European Union law on public tendering — in the case under examination concerning excluded contracts and the general principles of free competition, non-discrimination, transparency and proportionality — preclude national legislation which permits the direct awarding of ambulance services on the ground that a framework contract such as that contested in this case, which provides for the reimbursement also of fixed and ongoing costs, must be classified as having a pecuniary interest? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Does European Union law on public tendering — in the case under examination concerning excluded contracts and the general principles of free competition, non-discrimination, transparency and proportionality — preclude national legislation which permits the direct awarding of ambulance services on the ground that a framework contract such as that contested in this case, which provides for the reimbursement also of fixed and ongoing costs, must be classified as having a pecuniary interest?

---
No. 44392.

#### Protests 650136-G, etc., of Strauss Bros. & Co. (New York).

Opinion by

Dallinger, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of *Dow*v. *United States*(21 C. C. P. A. 282, T. D. 46816) and Abstracts 34372, 34924, 34928, and 38680 the tape measures, glove driers, and curling irons in question were held dutiable at 40 percent under paragraph 339 as claimed.
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 Transportation

###### Office of the Secretary 

The following Agreements were filed with the Department of Transportation under the Sections 412 and 414 of the Federal Aviation Act, as amended (49 U.S.C. 1383 and 1384) and procedures governing proceedings to enforce these provisions. Answers may be filed within 21 days after the filing of the application. 

*Docket Number:*                     OST-2007-28173.                 

*Date Filed:*                     May 8, 2007.                 

*Parties:*                     Members of the International Air Transport Association.                 

*Subject:*                     CAC/35/Meet/007/07 dated, Expedited Resolutions 801r, 809, 809e, 819, 851 & 853 (Minutes relevant to the Resolutions are included in CAC/35/Meet/006/07 dated 1 May 2007).                 

*Intended effective date:*                     1 July 2007.                 

Renee V. Wright, 

Program Manager, Docket Operations, Federal Register Liaison.

[FR Doc. E7-9827 Filed 5-21-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4910-9X-P
# C_2014142EN.01000802.xml

| 12.5.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 142/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.5.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 142/8

---

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 20 March 2014 — Rousse Industry v European Commission

(Case C-271/13 P) (1)

1

((Appeal - State aid - Aid granted by the Republic of Bulgaria in the form of debt write-off - Commission decision declaring that aid incompatible with the internal market and ordering its recovery - Concept of ‘new aid’ - Duty to state reasons))

2014/C 142/09

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Rousse Industry (represented by: A Angelov and S Panov, advokati)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: C. Urraca Caviedes and D. Stefanov, Agents)

Other party to the proceedings:

Re:

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of 20 March 2013 in Case T-489/11 Rousse Industry v Commission, by which the General Court (Fourth Chamber) dismissed the action brought by Rousse Industry for the annulment in part of Commission Decision 2012/706/EU of 13 July 2011 on the State aid SA.28903 (C 12/2010) (ex N 389/2009) implemented by Bulgaria in favour of Rousse Industry (OJ 2012 L 320, p. 27) — State aid in the form of debt write-off — Decision declaring that aid incompatible with the internal market and ordering its recovery — Infringement of procedural rules adversely affecting the rights of the applicant — Infringement of EU law by the General Court.

Rousse Industry

Commission

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal.

| 2. | Orders Rousse Industry AD to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Rousse Industry AD to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 207, 20.7.2013.

1

---