alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 23.0  CONSENT OF CLARK, SCHAEFER, HACKETT & CO.


<PAGE>

              CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
(No. 333-59605) on Form S-8 of Lenox Bancorp, Inc. pertaining to the 1997
Incentive Plan of our report dated February 2, 1999, relating to the
consolidated balance sheets of Lenox Bancorp, Inc. as of December 31, 1998 and
1997 and the related consolidated statements of income, comprehensive income,
changes in stockholders' equity and cash flows for each of the three years in
the period ended December 31, 1998, which report appears in the Annual Report
on Form 10KSB for the year ended December 31, 1998.



/s/ CLARK, SCHAEFER, HACKETT & CO.
----------------------------------
CLARK, SCHAEFER, HACKETT & CO.

Cincinnati, Ohio
March 29, 1999
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION 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 Quarterly Report
of UTStarcom, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report").

In
connection with the Report, we, Hong Liang Lu and Francis P. Barton, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes
Oxley Act of 2002, that:



Dated:
August 9, 2006

|By: |  | /s/HONG LIANG LUName: Hong Liang Lu
Title:President and Chief Executive Officer |  | 
|--- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 
|By: |  | /s/FRANCIS P. BARTONName: Francis P. Barton                                     |  | 
|    |  | Title:Executive Vice President of Finance, Chief Financial Officer             

---



QuickLinks
EXHIBIT 32.1


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


In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Americare Health
Scan, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Dr. Joseph P. D'Angelo, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of 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 results of operations of
   the company.

Date: October 15, 2008       /s/  Dr. Joseph P. D'Angelo
      ----------------      ---------------------------
                            Dr. Joseph P. D'Angelo, President, Chief
                            Executive Officer

      October 15, 2008        /s/  Robert Cano
      ----------------      --------------------
                            Robert Cano, Chief Financial Officer
Case 1:01-cv-02842 Document 1 Filed 04/20/2001 Page 1 of 18
Case 1:01-cv-02842 Document 1 Filed 04/20/2001 Page 2 of 18
Case 1:01-cv-02842 Document 1 Filed 04/20/2001 Page 3 of 18
Case 1:01-cv-02842 Document 1 Filed 04/20/2001 Page 4 of 18
Case 1:01-cv-02842 Document 1 Filed 04/20/2001 Page 5 of 18
Case 1:01-cv-02842 Document 1 Filed 04/20/2001 Page 6 of 18
Case 1:01-cv-02842 Document 1 Filed 04/20/2001 Page 7 of 18
Case 1:01-cv-02842 Document 1 Filed 04/20/2001 Page 8 of 18
Case 1:01-cv-02842 Document 1 Filed 04/20/2001 Page 9 of 18
Case 1:01-cv-02842 Document 1 Filed 04/20/2001 Page 10 of 18
Case 1:01-cv-02842 Document 1 Filed 04/20/2001 Page 11 of 18
Case 1:01-cv-02842 Document 1 Filed 04/20/2001 Page 12 of 18
Case 1:01-cv-02842 Document 1 Filed 04/20/2001 Page 13 of 18
Case 1:01-cv-02842 Document 1 Filed 04/20/2001 Page 14 of 18
Case 1:01-cv-02842 Document 1 Filed 04/20/2001 Page 15 of 18
Case 1:01-cv-02842 Document 1 Filed 04/20/2001 Page 16 of 18
Case 1:01-cv-02842 Document 1 Filed 04/20/2001 Page 17 of 18
Case 1:01-cv-02842 Document 1 Filed 04/20/2001 Page 18 of 18
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                      40,974,938
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  129,884
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            41,617,517
<PP&E>                                      25,276,504
<DEPRECIATION>                               8,399,219
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              58,967,159
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        9,852,637
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       152,681
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                58,967,159
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            10,316,367
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               19,491,243
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             9,614,495
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (18,279,463)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (18,279,463)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (18,279,463)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (1.34)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.34)


</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Patrick J. Ackley, Appellant.

[944 NYS2d 360]—

Spain, J.

Appeal from an order of the County Court of Broome County (Smith, J), entered August 5, 2011, which classified defendant as a risk level three sex offender pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act.

In December 2007, defendant pleaded guilty in Broome County to criminal sexual act in the second degree and was sentenced to a prison term of 2 to 4 years. Thereafter, in October 2008, defendant pleaded guilty in Tioga County to attempted sexual abuse in the first degree and was sentenced to a prison term of 2 to 4 years to be served concurrently with the term imposed in 2007. Prior to defendant’s anticipated release from prison, the Board of Examiners of Sex Offenders prepared a risk assessment instrument pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act *(see*Correction Law art 6-C), recommending that he be classified as a risk level three sexually violent offender. Following a hearing, County Court denominated defendant a risk level three sex offender. Defendant now appeals.

We affirm. Defendant’s sole contention is that County Court erred in assessing 20 points under risk factor 4 for a continuing course of sexual misconduct. The People must establish the risk level assessment by clear and convincing evidence, and reliable hearsay, such as a sworn statement by the victim to police, may be sufficient to meet that burden *(see People v Kruger,*88 AD3d 1169,1170 [2011], *lv denied*18 NY3d 806 [2012]; *People v Miller,*81 AD3d 1064, 1065 [2011]). Although defendant entered a guilty plea to only one charge in the Broome County matter, the court “was not limited to consideration of the crime of conviction, however, and properly viewed the victim’s statement to police” *(People v Callan,*62 AD3d 1218, 1219 [2009]). Here, the 14-year-old victim gave a detailed statement to police depicting sexual contact with defendant on five separate dates in July 2007. Thus, notwithstanding defendant’s testimony to the contrary, which the court rejected as “totally incredible,” we find that the court’s determination that defendant engaged in a *1464continuing course of sexual misconduct is supported by clear and convincing evidence (see *People v Wizes,*79 AD3d 1543, 1543-1544 [2010]; *People v Brownell,*66 AD3d 1060, 1061 [2009]; *People v Callan,*62 AD3d at 1218-1219).

Mercure, J.P., Lahtinen, McCarthy and Garry, JJ., concur. Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Philip Bertone, Appellant.

[945 NYS2d 576]

— Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Cohen, J.), rendered March 29, 2011, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence. Assigned counsel has submitted a brief in accordance with *Anders v California*(386 US 738 [1967]), in which he moves for leave to withdraw as counsel for the appellant.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We are satisfied with the sufficiency of the brief filed by the defendant’s assigned counsel pursuant to *Anders v California*(386 US 738 [1967]), and, upon an independent review of the record, we conclude that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is, therefore, granted *(see Anders v California,*386 US 738 [1967]; *Matter of Giovanni S. [Jasmin A.],*89 AD3d 252 [2011]; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631 [1976]; *cf. People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606 [1979]). Dillon, J.P., Balkin, Belen and Austin, JJ., concur.
#### In the Matter of: AUBURN ACE HOLDINGS LLC, Debtor, Auburn Ace Holdings LLC, Appellant, v. Centrum Financial Svcs Inc., Wells Fargo Bank NA, Appellees.

No. 10-35364.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted June 9, 2011.

Filed July 6, 2011.

Dean Gordon Von Kallenbach, Young Denormandie, PC, Seattle, WA, for Appellant.

Ann T. Marshall, Kennard M. Goodman, Esquire, Bishop, White, Marshall & Wei-bel, P.S., Seattle, WA, for Appellees.

Before: REINHARDT, W. FLETCHER, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

*545MEMORANDUM *

Appellant Auburn Ace Holdings L.L.C. (Auburn Ace) challenges the bankruptcy court’s grant of summary judgment and dismissal of Auburn Ace’s quiet title action against Appellee Centrum Financial Services Inc. (Centrum). Auburn Ace maintains that its president, Ben Errez (Errez), lacked the requisite authority to enter into a loan agreement with Centrum. The bankruptcy court held that it was reasonable for Centrum to rely on a written consent providing Errez with authority to negotiate the terms of any loan without the approval of Auburn Ace’s board of directors.

The bankruptcy court properly granted summary judgment because there was no material factual dispute that the written consent and an opinion letter from Auburn Ace’s corporate attorney bestowed upon Errez, at a minimum, apparent authority to enter into the loan. *See Hoglund v. Meeks,*139 Wash.App. 854, 170 P.3d 37, 44 (Wash.App.2007) (“The principal is bound by the act of his agent when he has placed the agent in such position that persons of ordinary prudence, reasonably conversant with business usages and customs, are thereby led to believe and assume that the agent is possessed of certain authority and to deal with him in reliance upon such assumption.”) (citation and alteration omitted). Because the title insurance company confirmed Errez’s apparent authority on Centrum’s behalf, Centrum “actually believe[d] such authority existed.” *BP Land & Cattle LLC v. Balcom & Moe, Inc.,*121 Wash.App. 251, 86 P.3d 788, 790 (Wash. App.2004), *as amended*(citation omitted); *see also W.L. Feely Lumber Co. v. Bookstaver-Burns Lumber Co.,*181 Wash. 503, 43 P.2d 953, 955 (1935) (“The apparent authority, so far as third persons are concerned is the real authority, and when a third person has ascertained the apparent authority with which the principal has clothed the agent, he is under no further obligation to inquire into the agent’s actual authority.”) (citation omitted).1

AFFIRMED.

*

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

1

. Because the bankruptcy court properly granted summary judgment premised on Er-rez’s apparent authority to enter into the loan, we do not address the parties’ alternative arguments regarding actual authority, the Washington Deed of Trust Act, election of remedies, ratification of the loan, or equitable subrogation.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Marilyn Kelly

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

November 25, 2008 

p1117 

Order 

 

November 25, 2008 

137129 

CHARLES JOHNSON, 

Plaintiff, 

v SC: 137129 

 AGC: 1489/08; 1490/08 

ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMISSION, 

Defendant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On the order of the Court, the complaint for superintending control is considered, 

and relief is DENIED, because the Court is not persuaded that it should grant the 

requested relief.
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 Commerce

###### National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

          - [RTID 0648-XB258]

# AGENCY:

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

# ACTION:

Notice; public meeting.

# SUMMARY:

The Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council's Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish (MSB) Committee and MSB Advisory Panel will hold a joint public meeting.

# DATES:

The meeting will be held on Friday, August 6, 2021, from 9 a.m. to 2 p.m. For agenda details, see **SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION**.

# ADDRESSES:

The meeting will be held via webinar. Webinar connection, agenda items, and any additional information will be available at *www.mafmc.org/​council-events.*

*Council address:* Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 800 N State Street, Suite 201, Dover, DE 19901; telephone: (302) 674-2331; *www.mafmc.org.*

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Christopher M. Moore, Ph.D., Executive Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, telephone: (302) 526-5255.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The purpose of the meeting is for the MSB Committee and MSB Advisory Panel to provide recommendations regarding Atlantic mackerel, potentially including: 2021/22 emergency action, future specifications, and/or rebuilding plan modifications and options.

## Special Accommodations

The meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to Kathy Collins at the Council Office, (302) 526-5253, at least 5 days prior to the meeting date.

*Authority:*16 U.S.C. 1801*et seq.*

Dated: July 20, 2021.

Tracey L. Thompson,

Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 2021-15714 Filed 7-22-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
Order entered June 30, 2014

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-14-00160-CV

FRANCISCO RENTERIA, Appellant

V.

JUANA GUAJARDO, Appellee

On Appeal from the 303rd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DF13-17723

ORDER

The reporter’s record in this case is overdue. By postcard dated March 14, 2014, we 

notified the Court Reporter that the reporter’s record was overdue. We directed the Court 

Reporter to file the record within thirty days. To date, the reporter’s record has not been filed.

We ORDER Donna Kindle, Official Court Reporter for the 303rd Judicial District Court, 

to file, within TEN DAYS of the date of this order, either: (1) the reporter’s record; (2) written 

verification that no hearings were recorded; or (3) written verification that appellant has not 

requested or paid for or made arrangements to pay for the record. We notify appellant that if we 

receive verification the record has not been requested, or paid for, or no arrangements have 

been made to pay for the record, we may order the appeal submitted without the reporter’s 

record. See Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(c).
We DIRECT the Clerk to send copies of this order, by electronic transmission, to:

Honorable Denise Garcia

Presiding Judge, 303rd Judicial District Court

Donna Kindle

Official Court Reporter, 303rd Judicial District Court

Counsel for all parties.

/s/ ADA BROWN 

JUSTICE
# C_2020390EN.01003501.xml

| 16.11.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 390/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.11.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 390/35

---

Judgment of the General Court of 23 September 2020 — Basaglia v Commission

(Case T-727/19) (1)

(Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Documents concerning certain projects in the context of the eTEN programme and of the fifth and sixth framework programmes for research and technological development - Restriction of the request for access - Partial refusal to grant access - Exception relating to the protection of privacy and the integrity of the individual - Exception relating to the protection of the commercial interests of a third party - Overriding public interest - Obligation to carry out a specific and individual examination)

(2020/C 390/50)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: Giorgio Basaglia (Milan, Italy) (represented by: G. Balossi, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: C. Ehrbar and A. Spina, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment of Commission Decision C(2019) 6474 final of 4 September 2019 concerning a confirmatory application for access to documents pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ 2001 L 145, p. 43).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | annuls Commission Decision C(2019) 6474 final of 4 September 2019 concerning a confirmatory application for access to documents pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents, in so far as it includes a restriction of the request for access and in so far as it includes a refusal to grant access based on the first indent of Article 4(2) of that regulation; |
| --- | --- |

1.

annuls Commission Decision C(2019) 6474 final of 4 September 2019 concerning a confirmatory application for access to documents pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents, in so far as it includes a restriction of the request for access and in so far as it includes a refusal to grant access based on the first indent of Article 4(2) of that regulation;

| 2. | dismisses the action as to the remainder; |
| --- | --- |

2.

dismisses the action as to the remainder;

| 3. | orders Giorgio Basaglia and the European Commission each to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

orders Giorgio Basaglia and the European Commission each to bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 432, 23.12.2019.

---
EXHIBIT 21.1SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT1) SanDisk Limited, a Japanese company 2) SanDisk GmbH, a German company 3) SanDisk Israel (Tefen) Ltd., an Israeli company 4) SanDisk Hong Kong Limited, a Hong Kong company 5) SanDisk (Cayman) Limited, a Cayman Islands company 6) SanDisk Sweden AB, a Swedish company 7) SanDisk U.K. Limited, a United Kingdom company 8) SanDisk Scotland Limited, a United Kingdom company 9) SanDisk Secure Content Solutions, Inc., a Delaware corporation 10) SanDisk Secure Content Solutions, Ltd., an Israeli company 11) SanDisk Equipment Ltd., a Japanese company 12) SanDisk Manufacturing Limited, a Republic of Ireland company 13) SanDisk International Limited, a Republic of Ireland company 14) SanDisk India Device Design Centre, Ltd., an Indian company 15) SanDisk Korea Ltd, (YH), a Korean company 16) SanDisk B.V., a Netherlands company 17) SanDisk Operations Limited, a Republic of Ireland company 18) SanDisk (Ireland) Limited, a Republic of Ireland company 19) SanDisk China Holding Limited, a Republic of Ireland company 20) SanDisk China Limited, a Republic of Ireland company 21) SanDisk SAS, a French company 22) SanDisk Taiwan Limited, a Taiwanese company 23) SanDisk Semiconductor (Shanghai) Co. Ltd., a Peoples Republic of China company 24) SanDisk 3D LLC, a Delaware company 25) SanDisk China LLC, a Delaware company 26) SanDisk IL Ltd. (formerly msystems Ltd.), an Israeli company 27) SanDisk Holdings Netherlands Antilles N.V., a Netherlands company 28) M-Systems, Inc, a New York company 29) M-Systems Holdings LLC, a Delaware company 30) M-Systems Finance Inc., a Cayman Islands company 31) M-Systems (Cayman) Limited, a Cayman Islands company 32)  P.P.S. von Koppen Pensioen B.V., a Netherlands company 33) M-Systems B.V., a Netherlands company 34) M-Systems Asia Ltd., a Taiwanese company 35) M-Systems Flash Disk Pioneers (Japan), Inc., a Japanese company 36) M-Systems UK Ltd., a United Kingdom company 37) M-Systems Flash Disk Pioneers (Shenzhen) Trading Ltd., a Peoples Republic of China company 38) M-Systems Italy S.R.L, an Italian company 39) M-Systems Korea, a Korean company 40) U3 LLC, a Delaware company 41) U3 Israel Ltd., an Israeli company 42) M. Systems Flash Disk Pioneers Espana S.L.U., a Spanish company 43) Microelectronica Espanola S.A.U., a Spanish company 44) ExcelData S.A., a Spanish company 45) TwinSys Ltd., an Israeli company (50.1% ownership) 46) TwinSys Data Storage L.P., an Israeli partnership (50.1% beneficial interest) 47) MR-Flash Ltd., an Israeli company (50.1% ownership) 48) MR-Flash L.P., an Israeli partnership (50.1% beneficial interest) 49) Smart Caps Ltd., an Israeli company (79.95%ownership) 50)  Flash Holdings, an Israeli company 51) Eurom Flashware, an Israeli company 52) Key Computing Ltd., an Israeli company 53) MegaSIM Ltd., an Israeli company
1