the literal wording of 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)(2)(A), matters concerning the administration of the estate, because it involves a claim that arose out of the administrative activities of the debtor-in-possession.” Id. at 168 (citing In re L.A. Clarke & Son, Inc., supra at 32. The Court similarly concluded that the action “falls within the literal wording of 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)(2)(0) other proceedings affecting the liquidation of the assets of the estate because the claim arose out of the debtor’s efforts to liquidate estate assets.” Id. (citing In re Franklin Computer Corp., supra at 625-26). In making this determination, the First Circuit observed that the majority of courts considering similar post-petition claims have concluded that they are core. Id. See, e.g., In re Mansker, supra, (<HOLDING>); In re Clarke, supra, (holding an action to
holding an action to recover a postpetition account receivable to be core holding that a postpetition claim under section 1305 is a liability that arises postpetition and relates only to postpetition activity holding that a proceeding under section 547 is a core proceeding holding an action for postpetition breach of an agreement to purchase property to be a core proceeding holding consideration for covenant not to compete contained in purchase agreement for sale of business not tantamount to earnings from services performed postpetition