alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
ex10a.htm
















Exhibit 10(a)

















Consent of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm












We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in Post-Effective Amendment No. 51 to the 1933 Act Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 333-18419) pertaining to Lincoln National Variable Annuity Account H, which is incorporated by reference into Post-Effective Amendment No. 51 to the 1933 Act Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 333-63505) and Amendment No. 353 to the 1940 Act Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 811-05721), and to the use therein of our reports dated (a) April 1, 2014, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of The Lincoln National Life Insurance Company and (b) April 1, 2014, with respect to the financial statements of Lincoln National Variable Annuity Account H for the registration of interests in a separate account under individual flexible payment deferred variable annuity contracts.


















/s/ Ernst & Young LLP












Philadelphia, Pennsylvania


April 1, 2014
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 45 (Friday, March 7, 1997)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 10498]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-5643]


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


ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52

[OR59-7274b, OR60-7275b; FRL-5696-7]


Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans: Oregon

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The EPA proposes to approve the State Implementation Plan 
(SIP) revisions submitted by the State of Oregon for the purpose of 
approving two source-specific Reasonably Available Control Technology 
(RACT) volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions standards: Cascade 
General, Inc., a ship repair yard in Portland, Oregon; and, White 
Consolidated, Inc. (doing business as Schrock Cabinet Co.) a wood 
cabinet manufacturing facility in Hillsboro, Oregon. These SIP 
revisions are required by the Clean Air Act (CAA) and were submitted by 
the State. In the Final Rules Section of this Federal Register, the EPA 
is approving the State's SIP revisions as a direct final rule without 
prior proposal because the Agency views this as a noncontroversial 
revision amendment and anticipates no adverse comments. A detailed 
rationale for the approval is set forth in the direct final rule. If no 
adverse comments are received in response to this proposed rule, no 
further activity is contemplated in relation to this rule. If the EPA 
receives adverse comments, the direct final rule will be withdrawn and 
all public comments received will be addressed in a subsequent final 
rule based on this proposed rule. The EPA will not institute a second 
comment period on this action.

DATES: Comments on this proposed rule must be received in writing by 
April 7, 1997.

ADDRESSES: Written comments should be addressed to Montel Livingston, 
Environmental Protection Specialist (OAQ-107), Office of Air Quality, 
at the EPA Regional Office listed below. Copies of the documents 
relevant to this proposed rule are available for public inspection 
during normal business hours at the following locations. The interested 
persons wanting to examine these documents should make an appointment 
with the appropriate office at least 24 hours before the visiting day.

Environmental Protection Agency, Region 10, Office of Air Quality, 1200 
6th Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101.
Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, 811 S.W. Sixth Avenue, 
Portland, OR 97204-1390.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Denise Baker, Office of Air Quality 
(OAQ-107), EPA, 1200 6th Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101, (206) 553-8087.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: See the information provided in the Direct 
Final action which is located in the Rules Section of this Federal 
Register.

    Dated: February 21, 1997.
Jane S. Moore,
Acting Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 97-5643 Filed 3-6-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 888 

To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to allow for greater State 

flexibility with respect to excluding providers who are involved in abortions. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 30, 2019 

Mr. DUFFY (for himself, Mr. MOONEY of West Virginia, Mr. MULLIN, Mr. 

WEBER of Texas, Mr. ALLEN, Mr. DAVID P. ROE of Tennessee, Mr. 

GROTHMAN, Mr. GAETZ, Mr. NORMAN, Mr. LAMBORN, Mr. BANKS, Mr. 

FULCHER, Mr. SMITH of New Jersey, Mr. GIANFORTE, and Mr. SPANO) 

introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to allow 

for greater State flexibility with respect to excluding 

providers who are involved in abortions. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Women’s Public 

5 Health and Safety Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•HR 888 IH

1 SEC. 2. INCREASING STATE FLEXIBILITY IN DETERMINING 

2 PARTICIPATION OF PROVIDERS WHO PER3 FORM, OR PARTICIPATE IN THE PERFORM4 ANCE OF, ABORTIONS. 

5 Section 1902 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 

6 1396a) is amended— 

7 (1) in subsection (a)(23), by striking ‘‘sub8 section (g)’’ and inserting ‘‘subsection (g), sub9 section (qq),’’; and 

10 (2) by adding at the end the following new sub11 section: 

12 ‘‘(qq) RULES WITH RESPECT TO DETERMINATION

13 OF PARTICIPATION OF PROVIDERS WHO PERFORM, OR

14 PARTICIPATE IN THE PERFORMANCE OF, ABORTIONS.— 

15 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraph (2), 

16 for purposes of this title, a State, at its option, may 

17 establish criteria with respect to the participation 

18 under the State plan (or a waiver of such plan) of 

19 an institution, an agency, an entity, or a person who 

20 performs, or participates in the performance of, 

21 abortions. 

22 ‘‘(2) EXCEPTION.—Paragraph (1) shall not 

23 apply to an abortion— 

24 ‘‘(A) if the pregnancy is the result of an 

25 act of rape or incest; or 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
3 

•HR 888 IH

1 ‘‘(B) in the case where a woman suffers 

2 from a physical disorder, physical injury, or 

3 physical illness that would, as certified by a 

4 physician, place the woman in danger of death 

5 unless an abortion is performed, including a 

6 life-endangering physical condition caused by or 

7 arising from the pregnancy itself. 

8 ‘‘(3) DEFINITIONS.—For purposes of this sub9 section, the terms ‘institution’, ‘agency’, or ‘entity’ 

10 mean the entire legal institution, agency, or entity, 

11 or any part thereof, including any institution, agen12 cy, or entity that controls, is controlled by, or is 

13 under common control with such institution, agency, 

14 or entity.’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
# C_2022368EN.01001402.xml

| 26.9.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 368/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.9.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 368/14

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Supremo (Spain) lodged on 3 June 2022 — Industria de Diseño Textil, S. A. (Inditex) v Buongiorno Myalert, S.A.

(Case C-361/22)

(2022/C 368/21)

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Tribunal Supremo

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Industria de Diseño Textil, S. A. (Inditex)

Respondent: Buongiorno Myalert, S.A.

Question referred

Must Article 6(1)(c) of Directive 89/104/EC (1) be interpreted as implicitly including within the limitation on trade mark rights the more general conduct now referred to in Article 14(1)(c) of Directive (EU) 2015/2436, (2) namely the use of ‘the trade mark for the purpose of identifying or referring to goods or services as those of the proprietor of that trade mark’?

---

(1)  First Council Directive 89/104/EEC of 21 December 1988 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks (OJ 1989 L 40, p. 1).

(2)  Directive (EU) 2015/2436 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2015 to approximate the laws of the Member States relating to trade marks (OJ 2015 L 336, p. 1).

---
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.4

             [LOGO OF H.J. GRUY AND ASSOCIATES, INC. APPEARS HERE]

                   CONSENT OF H.J. GRUY AND ASSOCIATES, INC.

  We hereby consent to the use of the name H.J. Gruy and Associates, Inc. and of
references to H.J. Gruy and Associates, Inc. under the caption "EXPERTS," and of
information contained in our reserve report dated March 28, 1996, prepared for 
Kelley Oil & Gas Corporation, in the Registration Statement on Form S-4 of 
Kelley Oil & Gas Corporation.

                                          H.J. GRUY AND ASSOCIATES, INC.

                                          /s/ Marilyn Wilson

                                          Marilyn Wilson, P.E.
                                          Chief Operating Officer

Houston, Texas
December 19, 1996
# C_2022463EN.01001402.xml

| 5.12.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 463/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.12.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 463/14

---

Appeal brought on 5 July 2022 by Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. against the judgment of the General Court (Second Chamber) delivered on 4 May 2022 in Case T-237/21, Fidelity National Information Services v EUIPO — IFIS (FIS)

(Case C-446/22 P)

(2022/C 463/18)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellant: Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (represented by: P. Wilhelm, avocat)

Other party to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

By order of 20 October 2022, the Court of Justice (Chamber determining whether appeals may proceed) held that the appeal was not allowed to proceed and that Fidelity National Information Services, Inc., should bear its own costs.

---
No. 11-10061.

#### Tarkington *v.*Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County.

Ct. App. Cal, 2d App. Dist. Cer-tiorari denied.
#### IN RE: ADOPTION OF: A.H.L., a Minor

853 EDA 2017

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

09/20/2017

2016-AO183 (Montgomery)

Affirmed
# C_2022424EN.01003601.xml

| 7.11.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 424/36 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.11.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 424/36

---

Action brought on 29 September 2022 — European Commission v Republic of Malta

(Case C-622/22)

(2022/C 424/47)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: B. Sasinowska, G. Wilms, Agents)

Defendant: Republic of Malta

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | declare that by not taking the measures necessary to ensure that the ATS provider designated by it complies with Article 3(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 29/2009 (1), Republic of Malta has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 4(3) TEU in conjunction with Article 3(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 29/2009; and |
| --- | --- |

—

declare that by not taking the measures necessary to ensure that the ATS provider designated by it complies with Article 3(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 29/2009 (1), Republic of Malta has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 4(3) TEU in conjunction with Article 3(1) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 29/2009; and

| — | order the Republic of Malta to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Republic of Malta to pay the costs.

Plea in law and main arguments

The Republic of Malta has been in non-compliance with Commission Regulation (EC) No 29/2009 of 16 January 2009 laying down requirements on data link services for the single European sky for more than 3 years.

---

(1)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 29/2009 of 16 January 2009 laying down requirements on data link services for the single European sky; OJ 2009, L 13, p. 3.

---
Here's how you know
 **Official websites use .mil** .mil
 **Secure .mil websites use HTTPS** lock () https://


Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
                
                Defense Threat Reduction Agency
                    Defense Threat Reduction Agency
            Search
                        Search Defense Threat Reduction Agency:
                            Search
                    Search Defense Threat Reduction Agency:
                        Search
    Home

    About
    
        DTRA Leadership

    DTRA History

    Mission

    Strategic Initiatives

    Foreign Malign Influence

    Agency Overview Brief (pdf)

    Agency Financial Report

    Careers & Opportunities
    
        Your Civilian Career

    Your Military Career

    Welcome Aboard

    Diversity and Inclusion

    Business
    
        DTRA Contract Award Data

    Office of Small Business

    Mentor Protege Program

    News & Media
    
        Press Center

    Contact Us

    Joint Operations Center  Download
 Details
 Share
 Publication
 Atomic Veterans' Finally to Get Commemorative Service Medal
 Read the Article
 SHARE
 PRINT
 
 ABOUT DTRA DTRA provides cross-cutting solutions to enable the Department of Defense, the United States Government, and international partners to deter strategic attack against the United States and its allies; prevent, reduce, and counter WMD and emerging threats; and prevail against WMD-armed adversaries in crisis and conflict.
 LEARN MORE News & Media»
 News Articles»
 Operating Status»
 Careers and Opportunities»
 Directions to DTRA»
 DTRA Operations Center»
 FOIA/Privacy»
 Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Office»
 Accessibility»
 No Fear Act Data»
 Information Quality»
 CONNECT WITH US
 MORE LINKS USA.gov»
 DTRA Careers»
 Open Government»
 Plain Writing»
 DoD »
 Privacy & Security»
 508 Accessibility»
 External Link Disclaimer»
 DoD Web Policy»
  8725 John J. Kingman Rd., Fort Belvoir, Va. 22060-6221 Welcome to the Defense Threat Reduction Agency’s website. If you are looking for the official source of information about the DoD Web Policy, please visit https://dodcio.defense.gov/DoD-Web-Policy/. The Defense Threat Reduction Agency is pleased to participate in this open forum in order to increase government transparency, promote public participation, and encourage collaboration. Please note that the Defense Threat Reduction Agency does not endorse the comments or opinions provided by visitors to this site. The protection, control, and legal aspects of any information that you provided to establish your account or information that you may choose to share here is governed by the terms of service or use between you and the website. Visit the Defense Threat Reduction Agency contact page at Contact Us for information on how to send official correspondence. Site Map »
 Stay Connected
            

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
Exhibit 13.1

Certification by the Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer pursuant to

18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

Pursuant to the requirement set forth in Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the
Exchange Act), and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code (18 U.S.C. §1350), Gil Beyen, Chief Executive Officer of ERYTECH Pharma S.A. (the Company), and Eric Soyer, Chief Financial Officer
and Chief Operating Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:



| | (1) | The Companys Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2017, to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 13.1 (the Report) fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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: April 24, 2018
|                    
|/s/ Gil Beyen       
|Name:                |  | Gil Beyen                                                                        
|Title:               |  | Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive
Officer)                            
|                    
|/s/ Eric Soyer      
|Name:                |  | Eric Soyer                                                                       
|Title:               |  | Chief Financial Officer and Chief Operating
Officer (Principal Financial Officer)
<PAGE>
 
                                                                  EXHIBIT 23(b)


                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Prospectus
constituting part of this Registration Statement on Form S-3 of our report dated
February 22, 1996, which appears on page F-2 of Plains Resources Inc.'s Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1995. We also consent to the
incorporation by reference of our report dated February 20, 1996, which appears
on page F-1 of Amendment No. 1 on Form 8-K/A dated February 21, 1996.  We also
consent to the references to us under the heading "Experts" in such Prospectus.


/s/ Price Waterhouse LLP
------------------------------
Price Waterhouse LLP

Houston, Texas
March 19, 1996
Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics

Document Control Office (7407M)

US EPA, 1201 Constitution Ave NW

Washington, D.C. 20460

Contact Number: (202) 564-9364

RE: PMN TS# A113MS

To Whom It May Concern:

The CAS number for [_ ,] was

determined by comparing the intermediate substance with this CAS number description.
# C_2022064EN.01003001.xml

| 7.2.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 64/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.2.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 64/30

---

Action brought on 9 December 2021 — Daw v EUIPO — Sapa Building Systems (alpina)

(Case T-766/21)

(2022/C 64/43)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Daw SE (Ober-Ramstadt, Germany) (represented by: A. Haberl, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Sapa Building Systems SpA (Naviglio, Italy)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union figurative mark alpina — Application for registration No 15 123 342

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 23 September 2021 in Case R 2198/2020-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order Sapa Building Systems SpA to bear the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order Sapa Building Systems SpA to bear the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 33(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 33(2) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

| — | Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
# C_2022424EN.01001701.xml

| 7.11.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 424/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.11.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 424/17

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil de Prud’hommes d’Agen (France) lodged on 21 April 2022 — BX v Keolis Agen SARL

(Case C-273/22)

(2022/C 424/19)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Conseil de Prud’hommes d’Agen

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: BX

Defendant: Keolis Agen SARL

Questions referred

| 1. | Must Article 7(1) of Directive 2003/88/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time (1) be interpreted as being directly applicable in relations between a private transport operator, with a single public service delegation, and its employees, in the light, in particular, of the liberalisation of the rail passenger transport sector? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Must Article 7(1) of Directive 2003/88/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time (1) be interpreted as being directly applicable in relations between a private transport operator, with a single public service delegation, and its employees, in the light, in particular, of the liberalisation of the rail passenger transport sector?

| 2. | What is a reasonable carry-over period in respect of the acquired entitlement to four weeks’ paid annual leave within the meaning of Article 7(1) of Directive 2003/88, in so far as the time during which annual leave may be accrued is one year? |
| --- | --- |

2.

What is a reasonable carry-over period in respect of the acquired entitlement to four weeks’ paid annual leave within the meaning of Article 7(1) of Directive 2003/88, in so far as the time during which annual leave may be accrued is one year?

| 3. | Is the application of an unlimited carry-over period in the absence of a provision of national law, a regulation or convention governing that period contrary to Article 7(1) of Directive 2003/88? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Is the application of an unlimited carry-over period in the absence of a provision of national law, a regulation or convention governing that period contrary to Article 7(1) of Directive 2003/88?

---

(1)  OJ 2003 L 299, p. 9.

---