alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                                                 Exhibit (23)(a)

            Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8 No. 333-32229 and No. 333-58686) pertaining to the CMS Energy
Corporation Performance Incentive Stock Plan and Executive Stock Option Plan,
respectively, (Form S-8 No. 333-76347) pertaining to the Employee Savings and
Incentive Plan of Consumers Energy Company, in the Registration Statements (Form
S-3 No. 333-51932, No. 333-52560, No. 333-27849, No. 333-37241, No. 333-74958,
No. 333-45556 and Form S-4 No. 33-60007) of CMS Energy Corporation and in the
related Prospectuses of our report dated February 27, 2004, with respect to the
consolidated financial statements and schedule of CMS Energy Corporation and
subsidiaries included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K/A-1) for the year ended
December 31, 2003.

                                                         /s/   ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Detroit, Michigan
July 19, 2004
<PAGE>

                                                                 Exhibit (23)(d)

            Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the following Registration
Statements and in the related Prospectuses:

      (1)   Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-120611) of Consumers Energy
            Company;

      (2)   Registration Statement (Form S-4 No. 333-122429) of Consumers Energy
            Company, and

      (3)   Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-76347) pertaining to
            Employee Savings and Incentive Plan of Consumers Energy Company;

of our reports dated March 7, 2005, with respect to the consolidated financial
statements and schedule of Consumers Energy Company, Consumers Energy Company
management's assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial
reporting, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of
Consumers Energy Company, included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the
year ended December 31, 2004.

                                                /s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Detroit, Michigan
March 7, 2005
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 90 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 90

   To amend the Migratory Bird Treaty Act to authorize hunting under 
                         certain circumstances.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 7, 2015

  Mr. Vitter introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
       referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend the Migratory Bird Treaty Act to authorize hunting under 
                         certain circumstances.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Migratory Bird Treaty Amendment Act 
of 2015''.

SEC. 2. MIGRATORY BIRDS.

    Section 3 of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 U.S.C. 704) is 
amended by adding at the end the following:
    ``(c) Exception.--Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, 
subsection (b) shall not apply to an agricultural producer, or a hunter 
with the permission of the agricultural producer, if--
            ``(1) the manipulation occurs on land of the agricultural 
        producer on which a crop during the current or immediately 
        preceding crop year was not harvestable due to a natural 
        disaster, as determined by the Secretary of Agriculture; and
            ``(2) a local representative of the Secretary of 
        Agriculture confirms that--
                    ``(A) the crop has been destroyed; and
                    ``(B) it would not be economically practicable to 
                harvest the crop.''.
                                 <all>
```
**Exhibit 31.2****CERTIFICATION**I, Michael Falvey, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Aspect Medical Systems, Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light ofthe circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this report;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have: a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is madeknown to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in whichthis report is being prepared;  b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internalcontrol over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to providereasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and thepreparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generallyaccepted accounting principles;  c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and  d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarterthat has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions): a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreportingDated: November 10, 2005               /s/ Michael Falvey   Michael Falvey   *Chief Financial Officer*
Submitted April 30,

remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed June 11, 2008

#### STATE OF OREGON, *Plaintiff-Respondent, v.*LARRY DEAN DOW, *Defendant-Appellant.*

Multnomah County Circuit Court

031135982; A130283

186 P3d 326

Ingrid Swenson, Executive Director, Peter Gartlan, Chief Defender, Legal Services Division, and Stephanie Hortsch, Deputy Public Defender, Office of Public Defense Services, filed the opening brief for appellant. On the supplemental brief was Stephanie Hortsch, Deputy Public Defender.

Hardy Myers, Attorney General, Mary H. Williams, Solicitor General, and Jeremy C. Rice, Assistant Attorney General, filed the briefs for respondent.

Before Haselton, Presiding Judge, and Armstrong, Judge, and Rosenblum, Judge.

PER CURIAM

*445PER CURIAM

Defendant appeals his conviction for robbery in the third degree, asserting that the trial court erred in denying his motion for a judgment of acquittal and in giving a special jury instruction requested by the state. We reject those assignments of error without discussion. In a supplemental brief, defendant also raises a preserved challenge to the trial court’s imposition of consecutive sentences without jury findings to support such sentences. In light of *State v. Ice,*343 Or 248, 170 P3d 1049 (2007), *cert*granted,_US_, 128 S Ct 1657 (2008), we agree that the trial court erred in that regard. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for resentencing, but otherwise affirm.

Defendant was convicted of robbery in the third degree, ORS 164.395 (Count 1); harassment, ORS 166.065 (Count 3); theft in the second degree, ORS 164.045 (Count 4); attempted theft in the second degree, ORS 161.405(2)(e) and ORS 164.045 (Count 5); and two counts of identity theft, ORS 165.800 (Counts 2 and 6). Counts 1 and 3 were tried to a jury; defendant pleaded guilty to the remaining counts. Based on its finding that Counts 2 and 4 arose from a continuous and uninterrupted course of conduct separate from Counts 1,3,5, and 6, the trial court directed that the sentences on the latter counts rim consecutively to those on the former. ORS 137.123(2). Defendant argues, and the state concedes (albeit contesting that *Ice*is correctly decided), that, under *Ice,*the trial court erred in imposing consecutive sentences based on its own findings of fact, rather than on facts found by a jury. We agree. In Ice, 343 Or at 267, the Supreme Court concluded that the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution provides a defendant with a right to jury determination, beyond a reasonable doubt, of facts used to impose consecutive sentences under ORS 137.123.

Remanded for resentencing; otherwise affirmed.
### 2014 OCT 2 ! 

### Ail A ' 

## VAS IilGTO.i.

4

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON STATE OF WASHINGTON, 

### DIVISION II Appellant, v. DWAYNE PAUL STEWART, Respondent. No. 44332 - 5 -II
UNPUBLISHED OPINION JOHANSON, C.J. — 

### The State ofWashington appeals the superior court's order amending Dwayne Paul Stewart' s offender score for his third degree domestic violence ( DV) assault conviction. The State argues that the superior court should have included Stewart' s other current offense, a misdemeanor fourth degree DV assault, in the third degree DV assault' s offender score because under RCW 9.94A.589(1)( a), the fourth degree DV assault was a "prior conviction for a repetitive domestic violence offense" for purposes of RCW 9. 94A.525(21)( c) ( emphasis added). 

### Because Stewart has served the entirety ofhis sentence and that sentence was identical to 

### the sentence the trial court originally imposed when Stewart' s offender score included the fourth degree DV assault, this case is moot. Although this issue could be characterized as a matter of 

### continuing and substantial public interest, we decline to consider this issue in light ofour recent decision in State v. Rodriguez, No. 44417 -8 -II (Wash. Ct. 

### App., Oct. 7, 2014), which addresses this identical issue.No. 44332 - 5 -II 

### Accordingly,this appeal is dismissed as moot. 

### A majority of the panel having determined that this opinion will not be printed in the Washington Appellate Reports, butwill be filed for public record in accordance with RCW 2.06.040, it is so ordered.
We concur:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS CONTAINED IN FORM 10-K FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1999
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          37,954<F1>
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   94,155
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,276
<INVENTORY>                                     49,704
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               209,149
<PP&E>                                         162,607
<DEPRECIATION>                                  63,676
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 358,972
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          111,849
<BONDS>                                         48,287
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           219
<OTHER-SE>                                     154,962
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   358,972
<SALES>                                        360,299
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               363,293
<CGS>                                          223,132
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  223,132
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                96,079
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   559
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 210
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 43,313
<INCOME-TAX>                                    15,549
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             27,764
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    27,764
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.48
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.46
<FN>
<F1>Includes Cash and Cash Equivalents Restricted
For Vehicle Service Contract Obligations of
$25,820.
</FN>


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 13.2







CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER 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 Annual Report of Evogene Ltd. (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Sigal Fattal, do certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 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 results of operations of the Company.




/s/ Sigal Fattal


Sigal Fattal


Chief Financial Officer





Date: April 30, 2015
EX-10.47



 Exhibit 10.47 
 FIRST AMENDMENT TO 
 COMMON STOCK PURCHASE AGREEMENT 

THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO COMMON STOCK PURCHASE AGREEMENT (the “Amendment”), dated as of November 17, 2011, by
and between ATHERSYS, INC., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), and ASPIRE CAPITAL FUND, LLC, an Illinois limited liability company (the “Buyer”). Capitalized terms used herein and not otherwise
defined herein shall have the meanings given to them in the Common Stock Purchase Agreement. 
 WHEREAS, the parties
hereto are parties to a Common Stock Purchase Agreement dated as of November 11, 2011 (the “Purchase Agreement”) pursuant to which the Buyer has agreed to purchase, and the Company has agreed to sell up to Twenty Million
Dollars ($20,000,000) of the Company’s common stock, par value $0.001 (the “Common Stock”); 

WHEREAS, the parties desire to amend the Purchase Agreement so that, subject to the terms and conditions set forth in the Purchase
Agreement as amended, the Floor Price is raised to a price per share of $1.45, as required by the Principal Market for compliance with its rules; 
 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the agreements, covenants and considerations contained herein, the parties hereto agree as follows: 

(1)   Amendments. 
 The second sentence of Section 1(h) of the Purchase Agreement is hereby amended and restated in its entirety as follows: 
 1. PURCHASE OF COMMON STOCK. 
 * * * 

(h) The Company’s Right to Require Purchases. . . . The “Floor Price” is a price per share of
$1.45, equal to (x) the Signing Market Price plus (y) $0.08, which shall be appropriately adjusted for any reorganization, recapitalization, non-cash dividend, stock split, reverse stock split or other similar transaction. . . .

 (2)   Miscellaneous. The provisions of Section 11 of the Purchase Agreement are hereby expressly
incorporated herein and shall govern this Amendment in all respects. 
 * * * * * 







 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Buyer and the Company have caused this First Amendment to
Common Stock Purchase Agreement to be duly executed as of the date first written above. 
  

			
	 THE COMPANY:
  

ATHERSYS, INC.

		
	By:	 	/s/ Gil Van Bokkelen        
	Name:	 	Dr. Gil Van Bokkelen
	 Title:
	 	Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
		 	


  

			
	BUYER:
	  
 ASPIRE
CAPITAL FUND, LLC

	 BY: ASPIRE CAPITAL PARTNERS, LLC

	 BY: SGM HOLDINGS CORP.

		
	By:	 	/s/ Steven G. Martin        
	Name:	 	Steven G. Martin
	 Title:
	 	 President



  
  
  

 
  
  

 
  
  

 
  

[SIGNATURE PAGE TO FIRST AMENDMENT TO COMMON STOCK PURCHASE AGREEMENT]
mpr10q201110ex10ck.htm


Exhibit (10)(ck)


 


 




THIRD (QUALIFICATION) AMENDMENT TO THE


MET-PRO CORPORATION SALARIED


EMPLOYEE STOCK OWNERSHIP PLAN







This Third (Qualification) Amendment to the Met-Pro Corporation Salaried Employee Stock Ownership Plan (the “Plan”) is made by Met-Pro Corporation (the “Company”).







W I T N E S S E T H:







WHEREAS, the Company established the Plan for its eligible employees effective as of December 16, 1975, and amended and restated as of February 1, 2007;







WHEREAS, the Company reserved the right in Section 16.01 of the Plan to amend the Plan at any time; and







WHEREAS, the Company wishes to amend the Plan as requested by the Internal Revenue Service in connection with the application for a favorable determination letter.







NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended as set forth below.







1.            Section 2.12 of the Plan is amended to read as follows:







“Company Stock” means common stock issued by the Company (or by a corporation which is a member of the same controlled group) which is readily traded on an established market.







2.            Section 5.02 of the Plan is amended to add the following language to the end thereof:







In the case of a transaction between the Plan and a disqualified person, the value of the Trust Fund shall be computed as of the date of the transaction.







3.            Section 7.06 of the Plan is amended to add the following language to the end thereof:


 


 


 


 


 




 




  





-1-











  






 


 


Notwithstanding anything in this Section to the contrary, the Plan shall not be obligated to acquire Company Stock from a Participant at an indefinite time determined upon the happening of an event.








4.            Section 12.01 is amended to add the following to the end thereof:










Payments made with respect to an Acquisition Loan by the Plan during a Plan Year shall not exceed an amount equal to the sum of such contributions and earnings received during or prior to the year less such payments in prior years and that such contributions and earnings must be accounted for separately in the books of account of the Plan until the Acquisition Loan is repaid.










5.            Effective for Plan Years beginning after December 31, 2001, Section 8.02(d) is amended to replace “separation of service” with “severance from employment” where such phrase appears in the Section.









IN ALL OTHER RESPECTS, this Plan is continued in full force and effect.  In order to maintain the terms of the Plan in a single document, this Third (Qualification) Amendment may be incorporated into the most recent restatement of the Plan.












IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Third (Qualification) Amendment to be executed by its duly authorized officer this   7th   day of  October       , 2011.








	
ATTEST:

	  	
Met-Pro Corporation


	  	  	  	  	  
	
By

	/s/ Amy Covely  	  	
By

	/s/ Gary Morgan
	  	  	  	  	  
	
Title:

	 HR Manager	  	
Title:

	VP Finance










 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 



-2-
GLOBAL ENTERTAINMENT CORPORATION





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 on Form 10-Q of Global Entertainment Corporation (the Company) for the fiscal quarter ending February 28, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Quarterly Report), the undersigned Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company each hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





1.
The Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





Dated April 14, 2011






/s/ Richard KozubackRichard KozbuackPresident & Chief Executive Officer/s/ Charles B. MathewsCharles B. MathewsVice President & Chief Financial Officer
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

742 

CAF 12-01425 

PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., CENTRA, FAHEY, CARNI, AND LINDLEY, JJ.

 

IN THE MATTER OF STEUBEN COUNTY DEPARTMENT 

OF SOCIAL SERVICES, ON BEHALF OF CAROL M. 

HOVER, PETITIONER-RESPONDENT, 

 

V ORDER

MORRIS J. SARFATY, RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.

 

DAVISON LAW OFFICE PLLC, CANANDAIGUA (MARY P. DAVISON OF COUNSEL), FOR

RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.

MICHELLE A. COOKE, BATH, FOR PETITIONER-RESPONDENT. 

 

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Steuben County

(Marianne Furfure, A.J.), entered July 6, 2012 in a proceeding

pursuant to Family Court Act article 4. The order denied in part

respondent’s objections to an order of the Support Magistrate entered

March 8, 2012. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is

unanimously affirmed without costs.

Entered: June 14, 2013 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court