alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 Interlink Global Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2003, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Anastasios N. Kyriakides, Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive Officer, and
Principal Accounting 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:

a) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and b) The information contained in this
Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.


                                        /s/ Anastasios N. Kyriakides
                                        Anastasios N. Kyriakides
                                        Chairman of the Board, Chief Executive
                                        Officer and Principal Accounting Officer
                                        December 12, 2005
SCHEDULE P 

(Form 8865)

Department of the Treasury 

Internal Revenue Service

Acquisitions, Dispositions, and Changes of Interests 

in a Foreign Partnership (under section 6046A)

▶ Attach to Form 8865. See Instructions for Form 8865.

▶ Information about Schedule P (Form 8865) and its separate instructions is at www.irs.gov/form8865.

OMB No. 1545-1668

2014

Name of person filing Form 8865 Filer’s identifying number

Name of foreign partnership EIN (if any) Reference ID number (see instr.)

Part I Acquisitions

(a) 

Name, address, and identifying number of 

person from whom your interest was acquired

(b) 

Date of acquisition

(c) 

FMV of 

interest acquired

(d) 

Basis in 

interest acquired

(e) 

% of interest 

before acquisition

(f) 

% of interest 

after acquisition

Part II Dispositions

(a) 

Name, address, and identifying number of 

person who acquired your interest

(b) 

Date of disposition

(c) 

FMV of 

interest disposed

(d) 

Basis in 

interest disposed

(e) 

% of interest 

before disposition

(f) 

% of interest 

after disposition

Part III Change in Proportional Interest

(a) 

Description of change

(b) 

Date of change

(c) 

FMV of 

interest

(d) 

Basis in 

interest

(e) 

% of interest 

before change

(f) 

% of interest 

after change

Part IV Supplemental Information Required To Be Reported (see instructions)

For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see the Instructions for Form 8865. Cat. No. 25943Q Schedule P (Form 8865) 2014
# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 18

- 185 V

Filed: May 8, 2019

UNPUBLISHED

ROISIN MAGEE

,

Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent. Special Processing Unit (SPU) ;
Rul ing on Entitlement; Concession;
Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA)

Paul R. Brazil, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA , for petitioner.

Camille Michelle Collett , U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1

Dorsey

, Chief Special Master:

On February 6, 2018

, petitioner 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 received an influenza ( “ flu ” ) vaccination in her right arm on October 11, 2016, and subsequently suffered a right shoulder injury related to vaccine administration ( “ SIRVA ”) . Petit ion at 1 . The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On May 7, 2019

, 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 has concluded that compensation is appropriate in this case

1 The undersigned intends to post this ruling on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website. 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, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from public access. Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, undersigned is 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).

2 N ational Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99

- 660, 100 Stat. 3755

.Id. at 4 . Respondent further agrees that petitioner ’ s alleged injury is consistent with a

SIRVA as defined by the V accine Injury Table

. Id.

In view of respondent’s position and the evidence of record, the undersigned find s that petitioner is entitle d to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Nora Beth Dorsey

Nora Beth Dorsey
Chief Special Master
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 23.1


CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

To the Board of Directors and Shareholders
U.S. Wireless Corporation

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Prospectus
constituting a part of Registration Statements on Form S-3 No. 333-30770, No.
333-82313 and No. 333-82312 (Post Effective Amendment No. 1 to the Registration
No. 333-82313) of our report dated May 15, 2000, except for Note 12 which is
dated June 21, 2000, relating to the consolidated financial statements of U.S.
Wireless Corporation appearing in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for
the year ended March 31, 2000.

We also consent to the reference to us under the caption "Experts" in the
Prospectus.



BDO SEIDMAN, LLP
San Francisco, California
April 13, 2001
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 36 (Thursday, February 22, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 11181]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-4314]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[NV-020-1430-EQ; N-73965]


Notice of Realty Action for Proposed Occupancy Lease of Public 
Lands, Nevada.

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: The proposed leasing of public lands for a year round 
residence.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

    The site proposed for leasing under provisions of section 302 of 
the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) of 1976 and 43 CFR 
Part 2920 is described as a portion of:

Mount Diablo Meridian, Nevada

T. 31 N., R. 23 E.,
    Sec. 11: S\1/2\SE\1/4\SE\1/4\NW\1/4\SW\1/4\, N\1/2\NE\1/4\NE\1/
4\SW\1/4\SW\1/4\, W\1/2\NW\1/4\NW\1/4\SE\1/4\SW\1/4\.
The proposal would include approximately 2.59 acres.
    The parcel affected by the proposed lease is located adjacent to 
the airport near the community of Empire, Nevada. No additional 
development/construction, or surface disturbance of the area would 
occur as a result of this lease.
    No other proposals will be accepted. The subject parcel is 
currently encumbered by a mobile home, garage, shed, corral, and is 
fenced. All structures on the subject parcel are owned by the applicant 
and were originally authorized in a Public Airport Lease that was 
issued March 10, 1982. The lease was issued pursuant to the Act of May 
24, 1928, as amended, (49 U.S.C. 211-214) and the regulations 
thereunder (43 CFR 2911).
    The purpose of the occupancy lease is to segregate the occupied 
area from the current Public Airport Lease N-12640. Therefore, no other 
proposals would be acceptable.
    The proposal would be authorized by a lease for a term of 10 years. 
The lease could be renewed at the discretion of the authorized officer.
    The subject parcel falls into the Market Rental/Minimum Transaction 
Value for Small Sites of 5 acres or Less Category, which has determined 
the rent to be $500.00 per year, for parcels less than 5 acres. This 
rent determination will be in effect until September 20, 2001 at which 
time it will be reviewed and adjusted accordingly.
    For a period of 45 days from the date of publication of this notice 
in the Federal Register, interested parties may submit comments to the 
Field Manager, Winnemucca Field Office, 5100 E. Winnemucca Boulevard, 
Winnemucca, Nevada 89445. In the absence of adverse comments, an 
application for the proposed use will be processed in accordance with 
propose application procedures.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mary Figarelle, Realty Specialist, 
Winnemucca Field Office, 5100 E. Winnemucca Boulevard, Winnemucca, 
Nevada 89445, or call (775) 623-1500.

    Dated: February 7, 2001.
Terry A. Reed,
Field Manager, Winnemucca, Nevada.
[FR Doc. 01-4314 Filed 2-21-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-HC-U
**Exhibit 23.1**

 

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM 

 

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Forms S-8 (Nos. 33-74160, 33-81114,33-81126, 33-80385, 33-80387, 33-80395, 333-53810 and 333-65196) and Form S-3 (No. 333-58764) of Vesta Insurance Group, Inc. and subsidiaries of our report dated May 24, 2006 relating to the financial statements, financial statement schedules,management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, which appears in this Form 10-K. 

 

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP 

 

Birmingham, Alabama 

May 24, 2006
**Exhibit 12.3**

**302 CERTIFICATION**

I,Luca D’Agnese certify that: 

1. I have reviewed this amended annual report on Form 20-F/A of Enersis Américas S.A.; 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary tomake the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all materialrespects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 

4. The company’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the company and have: 

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision,to ensure that material information relating to the company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; 

(b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under oursupervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles; 

(c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the company’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and 

(d) Disclosed in this report any change in the company’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period coveredby the annual report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the company’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

5. The company’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the company’s auditors and the audit committee of the company’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): 

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adversely affect the company’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

(b)Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the company’s internal control over financial reporting. 

Date: September 6, 2016
#### SUZANNE M. KAIRON *v.*BRUCE E. BURNHAM ET AL.

*Ronald W. Kutz,*in support of the petition.

*Michael D. Neubert*and *Gretchen G. Randall,*in opposition.

Decided May 26, 2010

The plaintiffs petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 120 Conn. App. 291 (AC 30583), is denied.
EXHIBIT 8.1
 List of Significant Subsidiaries
 The following is a list of the Companys significant subsidiaries as at March 15, 2010.
 State or
    
    Proportion ofJurisdiction of
    
    OwnershipName of Significant Subsidiary
    
    Incorporation
    
    InterestTEEKAY CHARTERING LIMITED
    
    MARSHALL ISLANDS
    
    
    100.0
    %TEEKAY HOLDINGS LIMITED
    
    BERMUDA
    
    
    100.0
    %SINGLE SHIP LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANIES
    
    MARSHALL ISLANDS
    
    
    100.0
    %TEEKAY LNG PARTNERS LP
    
    MARSHALL ISLANDS
    
    
    49.2
    %(1)TEEKAY OFFSHORE PARTNERS LP
    
    MARSHALL ISLANDS
    
    
    40.5
    %(1)TEEKAY OFFSHORE OPERATING LP
    
    MARSHALL ISLANDS
    
    
    69.6
    %(1)TEEKAY NAVION OFFSHORE LOADING PTE LTD.
    
    SINGAPORE
    
    
    69.6
    %(1)TEEKAY PETROJARL AS
    
    NORWAY
    
    
    100.0
    %TEEKAY TANKERS LTD.
    
    MARSHALL ISLANDS
    
    
    42.2
    %(2)
 (1)
    
    The partnership is controlled by its general partner. Teekay Corporation has a 100%
beneficial ownership in the general partner. In limited cases, approval of a majority or
supermajority of the common unit holders (in some cases excluding units held by the general
partner and its affiliates) is required to approve certain actions.(2)
    
    Proportion of voting power held is 51.6%.
EXHIBIT 11.1

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                               ZYTEC CORPORATION
                      COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER SHARE



                                                       Years ended December 31,
                                                       ------------------------
                                                  1996          1995          1994
                                              -----------   -----------   -----------
<S>                                           <C>           <C>           <C>        
Net income                                    $10,481,000   $ 3,878,000   $ 3,364,000

Net income per common and common
  equivalent share, primary                   $      1.04   $      0.42   $      0.36

Net income per common and common
  equivalent share, fully diluted             $      1.04   $      0.41   $      0.36

Primary:
  Weighted average number of common
     shares oustanding                          8,991,650     8,560,952     8,291,612
  Common equivalent shares:
     Dilutive stock options and warrants,
       using Modified Treasury Stock Method     1,048,421       706,832     1,032,324
                                              -----------   -----------   -----------
                                               10,040,071     9,267,784     9,323,936
                                              ===========   ===========   ===========


Fully: diluted:
  Weighted average number of common
     shares oustanding                          8,991,650     8,560,952     8,291,612
  Common equivalent shares:
     Dilutive stock options and warrants,
       using Modified Treasury Stock Method     1,048,421       827,928     1,032,324
                                              -----------   -----------   -----------
                                               10,040,071     9,388,880     9,323,936
                                              ===========   ===========   ===========

</TABLE>
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA 

Present: Judges Benton, Annunziata and Overton 

Argued at Richmond, Virginia 

JERRY WAYNE SCHEIB 

 MEMORANDUM OPINION* BY 

v. Record No. 0962-96-2 JUDGE NELSON T. OVERTON 

 JANUARY 28, 1997 

SARA SUE SCHEIB 

FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF CHESTERFIELD COUNTY 

William R. Shelton, Judge 

 Charles E. Powers (Edward D. Barnes; Edward 

D. Barnes & Associates, P.C., on briefs), for 

appellant. 

 Richard L. Locke (Mezzullo & McCandlish, on 

brief), for appellee. 

 Jerry Wayne Scheib (husband) appeals an order entered in the 

Circuit Court of Chesterfield County commanding his extradition 

from Tennessee due to his failure to pay child support, pursuant 

to Code § 20-84. He contends that the circuit court did not have 

the authority to order his extradition under this statute 

section. We agree, and we reverse. 

 The parties are fully conversant with the record in the 

cause, and because this memorandum opinion carries no 

precedential value, no recitation of the facts is necessary. 

 Husband lives in Tennessee, and has lived there continuously 

since before his divorce from Sara Sue Scheib (wife). After the 

 

 *Pursuant to Code § 17-116.010 this opinion is not 

designated for publication. 
- 2 - 

divorce, wife filed a Motion to Show Cause in the circuit court 

alleging that husband had failed to comply with various 

provisions of the final divorce decree, including failure to pay 

support. The judge found husband in contempt.1

 Husband did not 

appear at the hearing to determine sanctions for the contempt, 

and the judge issued a capias, stating that the case was a proper 

one for extradition under Code § 20-84. 

 Section 20-84 provides for the extradition of persons who 

leave the Commonwealth with the intention of abandoning or 

deserting a spouse or children or failing to support them. It is 

contained in Chapter 5 of Title 20 of the Code. "Proceedings 

under this chapter shall be had in the juvenile and domestic 

relations district courts . . . ." Code § 20-67. The proceeding 

in this case was before the circuit court, not the juvenile and 

domestic relations court. Because the circuit court did not have 

the authority to order extradition, that part of the order is 

reversed. 

 If the parties choose to pursue the matter further, the 

juvenile and domestic relations court must determine whether the 

case is indeed a proper one for extradition under Code § 20-84. 

 Reversed and dismissed.

 

 1For the purposes of this opinion, we assume without 

deciding that this is a criminal punishment.
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT UNITED STATES OF AM ER IC A,

Pla i ntiff-Appe lle e , v. HUGO LOUIS R

AM IR EZ, De fe nda n t-Appe l la

nt. No. 21-10078

D.C . No. 2:05-c r-00090-M C E-1
M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Ea ste rn Distric t of C a lifornia M o rrison C . Engla

nd, Jr., Distric t Judge , Pre siding Subm itte d De c e m

be r 7, 2021 ** San Fran c isc o , C a lifornia B e fore : GR

AB E R and C O LLINS, C irc uit Judge s, a nd C HOE-GR OVES, *** Judge
. Hugo R a m ire z a ppe a ls from the distric t c ourt’ s orde r de ny ing his motion for
c om pa ssiona te re le a se unde r 18 U.S.C . § 3582(c )(1)(A). W e re vie w for a buse of 

# FIL ED
DEC 9 2021 M OLLY C. DW Y E R, CLERK U. S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by Ninth C irc uit R

ule 36-3.

* * The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).

* * * The Honora

ble Je nnife r C h oe -Grove s, Judge for the Unite d State s C ourt of Inte rnationa l Tra de , sitting by de s igna tion.disc re tion, Unite d State s v. Aruda , 993 F.3d 797, 799 (9th C ir. 2021), a n d a ffirm
. The distric t c ourt a s sum e d tha t R am ire z ’ m e dic a l c o nditions, in c om bina tion with thethre at of C OVID-19, we re suffic ie nt to qua lify him for c onside ra tion for
re le a se pursua

nt to 18 U.S.C . § 3582(c )(1)(A)(i). B ut, a fte r c onside ring the 18 U.S.C . § 3553(a) fa c tors a nd the da nge r tha t R am ire z would poseto the c om m unity if re le a se d , the c ourt de nie d c om pa ssiona te re le a s e . R am ire z c onte n d s tha

t the distric t c ourt ga

ve insuffic ie nt c o nside ra tion to his
m e dic a l c onditions a

nd vulne ra

bility to C OVID-19 a

nd ga ve e xc e ssive we ight to the g ove rnm e nt’ s c onte ntions re ga rding his da

nge r to the c om

m unity . W e disa gre e . The we ight to give the va rious § 3553(a

) fa c tors is for thedistric t c ourt to de te rm ine , Unite d State s v. Gutie rre z -Sanc he z , 587 F.3d 904, 908 (9th C ir. 2009), a nd it did not a

buse its disc re tion in de ny ing re lie f. Se e Unite d State s v. R obe rtson, 895 F.3d 1206, 1213 (9th C ir. 2018) (re c o gniz ing tha t a distric t c ourt
a buse s its disc re t ion only i f its de c i sion a pplie s the wrong le g a l rule or is illogic a l, im pla usible , or without support in the re c ord). M ore ove r, c ontra ry to R am ire z ’
re m a ining a

rgum e nts, the c o urt did not re ly on a ny im prope r c o nside ra tion to de ny
re lie f. AFFIRM E D.

2