alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 23.2

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Board of Directors
Bioanalytical Systems, Inc.:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements
(Nos. 333-56123 and 333-56127) on Form S-8 of Bioanalytical Systems, Inc. and
subsidiaries of our report dated January 7, 2006, with respect to the
consolidated balance sheet of Bioanalytical Systems, Inc. and subsidiaries as of
September 30, 2005, and the related consolidated statements of operations,
stockholders' equity and comprehensive income (loss), and cash flows for each of
the years in the two-year period ended September 30, 2005, which report appears
in the September 30, 2006, annual report on Form 10-K of Bioanalytical Systems,
Inc. and subsidiaries.

/s/  KPMG LLP
Indianapolis, IN
December 28, 2006
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2150 

To amend title XVI of the Social Security Act to clarify that the value 

of certain funeral and burial arrangements are not to be considered 

available resources under the supplemental security income program. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 1, 2012 

Ms. SNOWE introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend title XVI of the Social Security Act to clarify 

that the value of certain funeral and burial arrangements 

are not to be considered available resources under the 

supplemental security income program. 

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

3 SECTION 1. CERTAIN FUNERAL AND BURIAL ARRANGE4 MENTS NOT CONSIDERED RESOURCES. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1613(d) of the Social Se6 curity Act (42 U.S.C. 1382b(d)) is amended— 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2150 IS

1 (1) in paragraph (2)(B), by inserting ‘‘, includ2 ing a trust or arrangement described in paragraph 

3 (5)’’ after ‘‘irrevocable arrangement’’; and 

4 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

5 ‘‘(5) If— 

6 ‘‘(A) an individual or the individual’s spouse en7 ters into an irrevocable contract with a provider of 

8 funeral goods and services for a funeral; and 

9 ‘‘(B) the individual or the individual’s spouse 

10 funds the contract by— 

11 ‘‘(i) prepaying for the goods and services 

12 and the funeral provider places the funds in a 

13 trust; 

14 ‘‘(ii) establishing an irrevocable trust fully 

15 funding the goods and services and the funeral 

16 provider is the named beneficiary of the trust; 

17 or 

18 ‘‘(iii) purchasing a life insurance policy 

19 that provides benefits to pay for the goods and 

20 services and irrevocably assigning such benefits 

21 to— 

22 ‘‘(I) the funeral provider; or 

23 ‘‘(II) an irrevocable trust fully fund24 ing the goods and services and the funeral 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 2150 IS

1 provider is the named beneficiary of the 

2 trust, 

3 then the irrevocable contract and the funding arrangement 

4 for the irrevocable contract shall not be considered a re5 source available to the individual or the individual’s 

6 spouse.’’. 

7 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 

8 1613(e)(3)(B) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1382b(e)(3)(B)) is 

9 amended by striking ‘‘In the case of an irrevocable trust 

10 established by an individual, if there are any cir11 cumstances under which payment from the trust’’ and in12 serting ‘‘Except as provided in subsection (d)(5)(B)(ii), if 

13 there are any circumstances under which payment from 

14 an irrevocable trust established by an individual’’. 

15 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

16 this section shall apply to payments for supplemental secu17 rity income benefits under title XVI of the Social Security 

18 Act for months beginning on or after the date of enact19 ment of this Act. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 32.2 

 

AMTECH SYSTEMS, INC. AND ITS SUBSIDIARIES 

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 

18 U.S.C. SECTION1350, 

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO 

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 

 

Inconnection with the Annual Report of Amtech Systems, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ended September 30, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robert T.Hass, Vice President – Finance and Chief Financial 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) Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.
April 24, 1958

Reap. Dec. 9138.

#### Paramount *Import Co., Inc.*v. *United States.*

Entered at New York, N. Y. Reap. Dec. 9061. Motion by defendant.
Exhibit 23.1

                     CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We  consent  to  the incorporation by reference in Halifax  Corporation's
Registration  Statement (Form S-8) pertaining to the Halifax  Corporation
1994 Key Employee Stock Option Plan of our report dated September 7 1999,
with respect to the consolidated balance sheet of Halifax Corporation  as
of  March 31, 1999 and the related consolidated statements of operations,
changes in stockholders' equity (deficit) and cash flows for each of  the
two  years  in  the  period then ended included in Halifax  Corporation's
Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended March 31, 2000.

                                      /s/Ernst & Young LLP
Washington, D.C.
July 7, 2000
EXHIBIT 32.02





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 PDF Solutions, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August 9, 2011 (the “Report”), I, Michael Shahbazian, Vice President, Interim Chief Financial Officer, 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.




By:
/s/ Michael ShahbazianMichael ShahbazianVice President, Interim Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)Date: August 9, 2011
# C_2012355EN.01003201.xml

| 17.11.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 355/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.11.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 355/32

---

Action brought on 4 September 2012 — Tsujimoto v OHIM — Kenzo (KENZO)

(Case T-393/12)

2012/C 355/67

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Kenzo Tsujimoto (Osaka, Japan) (represented by: A. Wenninger-Lenz, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Kenzo SA (Paris, France)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 29 May 2012 in case R 1659/2011-2; and |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 29 May 2012 in case R 1659/2011-2; and

| — | Order the defendant to bear the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to bear the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant

Applicant for a Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘KENZO’, for goods in class 33 — Community trade mark application No 6334544

Community trade mark concerned:

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community trade mark registration No 720706 for the word mark ‘KENZO’, for goods and services in classes 3, 18 and 25

Mark or sign cited in opposition:

Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejected the opposition

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Annulled the contested decision and rejected the CTM application in its entirety

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law:

Pleas in law:

| — | Infringement of Article 8(5) of Council Regulation No 40/94; and |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(5) of Council Regulation No 40/94; and

| — | Infringement of Articles 75 and 76 of Council Regulation No 40/94. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Articles 75 and 76 of Council Regulation No 40/94.

---
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      EXHIBIT 24

                        [RYDER SCOTT COMPANY LETTERHEAD]

                         CONSENT OF RYDER SCOTT COMPANY

         We consent to the use on Form 10-K of Sterling Drilling Fund 1983-2 of
our reserve report and all schedules, exhibits, and attachments thereto
incorporated by reference on Form 10-K and to any reference made to us on Form
10-K as a result of such incorporation.

                                       Very Truly Yours,

                                       /s/ RYDER SCOTT COMPANY
                                           PETROLEUM ENGINEERS

                                       RYDER SCOTT COMPANY
                                       PETROLEUM ENGINEERS

Denver, Colorado
March 10, 1997
#### PHILLIPS PETROLEUM COMPANY OF BARTLESVILLE, OKLAHOMA, d/b/a Pier 66, Appellant, v. Shirley DORN et vir., etc., Appellees.

No. 76-270.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

May 27, 1977.

Harry G. Carratt, of Morgan, Carratt & O’Connor, P.A., and Andrews & Lubbers, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.

Irving J. Whitman, of Whitman-& Wolfe, P.A., Miami, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Upon review and consideration of the briefs and record on appeal and oral argument we are of the opinion that the final judgment should be reversed.

The issue in *this*appeal relating to the granting of a new trial to plaintiff-appellee on *damages*only was not (and undoubtedly could not have been) previously considered by this court at the time of a similar earlier appeal because of this court’s specific admonitions set forth in its decision. See *Phillips Petroleum v. Dorn,*292 So.2d 429 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974) citing *Clement v. Aztec Sales, Inc.,*283 So.2d 68 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973).1 The Supreme Court of Florida has, since our holding in *Dorn,*supra,*reversed Clement v. Aztec Sales, Inc.,*supra, thereby removing a legal obstacle which we found to exist when we rendered our decision in *Dorn.*See also *Bowen v. Willard,*340 So.2d 110 (Fla.1976).

Accordingly, we hold that the granting of a new trial to plaintiff on the issue of damages only is properly before this court for its consideration at this time; and based upon the other relevant portions of our decision in *Dorn,*supra, relating to jury instructions, and *Clement v. Aztec,*supra, the final judgment is reversed with directions to grant plaintiff a new trial on the issues of liability *and*damages.

REVERSED, with directions.

MAGER, C. J., and ALDERMAN and LETTS, JJ., concur.

1

. It should be noted that the briefs of both parties submitted in the former appeal attempted to present an argument to this court on the issue of the granting of a new trial to the wife for *damages*only; however, this court specifically declined to consider this issue for the reasons hereinabove set forth. Cf. *Perkins v. Pare,*Fourth District Court of Appeal, Case Ño. 76-1755 opinion filed April 1'5, 1977.
No. 42167.

#### Protests 768744-G, etc., of Alka Bottle Capping Machine Co. et al. (New York).

Opinion fey

Dallinger, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with thequarterly report on Form 10-Q of Metabolix, Inc. (the “Company”) forthe quarter ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), we, Richard P. Eno, President,Chief Executive Officer and Principal Executive Officer of the Company andJoseph D. Hill, Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Principal FinancialOfficer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to ourknowledge that:

 

1.            The Report fully complieswith the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

2.            The information in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company.

 

This certification is beingprovided pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350 and is not to be deemed a part of theReport, nor is it to be deemed to be “filed” for any purpose whatsoever.

 
| Dated: May 8, 2008 |     | /s/   RICHARD P.  ENO               |
|-------------------------|----------|-----------------------------------------------|
| * *                | * * | *President and Chief Executive  Officer*      |
| * *                | * * | *(Principal Executive Officer)*               |
| * *                | * * | * *                                      |
| Dated: May 8, 2008 |     | /s/   JOSEPH D.  HILL               |
| * *                | * * | *Vice President and Chief  Financial Officer* |
| * *                | * * | *(Principal Financial Officer)*               |

 

----
CERTIFICATION
 
 I, Raffaele Attar, certify that:
 1.
I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of T.H. LEHMAN & CO., INCORPORATED;2.
Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this annual report;3.
Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;4.
The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:a)
designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report is being prepared;b)
evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this annual report (the "Evaluation Date"); andc)
presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;5.
The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):a)
all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; andb)
any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and6.
The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this annual report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.
 
 Date: June 25, 2004By:
/s/ Raffaele AttarRaffaele AttarActing Chairman andChief Executive Officer
# C_2012109EN.01001901.xml

| 14.4.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 109/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.4.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 109/19

---

Action brought on 27 January 2012 — Intesa Sanpaolo v OHIM — equinet Bank (EQUITER)

(Case T-47/12)

2012/C 109/42

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Intesa Sanpaolo SpA (Torino, Italy) (represented by: P. Pozzi, G. Ghisletti and F. Braga, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: equinet Bank AG (Frankfurt am Main, Germany)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 6 October 2011 in case R 2101/2010-1; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 6 October 2011 in case R 2101/2010-1;

| — | Order the Office to bear the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Office to bear the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant

Applicant for a Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: The figurative mark ‘EQUITER’, for goods and services in classes 9, 16, 35, 36, 38, 41 and 42 — Community trade mark application No 66707749

Community trade mark concerned:

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Community trade mark registration No 1600816 of the word mark ‘EQUINET’, for services in classes 35, 36 and 38; German trade mark registration No 39962727 of the word mark ‘EQUINET’, for goods and services in classes 9, 35, 36 and 38

Mark or sign cited in opposition:

Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejected the opposition

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Annulled the decision of the Opposition Division

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Articles 42(2) and (3) in conjunction with Article 15(1)(a) of Council Regulation No 207/2009, as the Board of Appeal made a wrong assessment concerning the material submitted in support of the use of the mark, as: (i) there are no sufficient indications on activity, time, place and extent of use of the mark; (ii) there is no sufficient indication concerning the nature of use of the trademark; and (iii) the evidence furnished by the opponent is insufficient to prove that the earlier trade mark was genuinely used in the relevant territory during the period of five years preceding the date of publication of the contested mark.

Pleas in law:

---
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 145 (Tuesday, July 29, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 40540]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-19894]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management
[MT-020-1060-00]


Notice of Meeting

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Montana, Miles City District, 
Billings Resource Area, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Billings Resource Area of the Miles City District will 
host a public hearing on the use of helicopters for the wild horse 
gather operation in the Pryor Mountain Wild Horse Range. The meeting 
will be held at the Bighorn Canyon National Recreation Area Visitor 
Center, in Lovell, Wyoming, on Thursday, August 14, 1997 at 7 p.m. 
Following the hearing, a general meeting to discuss the proposed gather 
operation will be held. The proposed removal operation is scheduled to 
begin no earlier than October 1, 1997.

DATES: Written comments on the proposal should be submitted to the 
address below by August 15, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Billings Resource Area, 
Linda Coates-Markle, 810 East Main, Billings, Montana 59105.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Linda Coates-Markle, Wild Horse and 
Burro Specialist, telephone (406) 238-1540.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A Draft Pryor Mountain Wild Horse Range Wild 
Horse Removal Plan was completed July 14, 1997 and is available for 
public review. Copies may be obtained from the above address.

    Dated: July 22, 1997.
Janet L. Edmonds,
Acting District Manager.

[FR Doc. 97-19894 Filed 7-28-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-DN-P
Before the First Division,

November 6, 1941.

No. 46563.

#### Petitions 6096-R, etc., of Osaki Shoten, Ltd., et al. (Honolulu).

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

The petitions were dismissed.