Income taxes. In June 2006, the Financial Accounting Standards Board, or FASB issued Interpretation No. 48, “Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes” , or FIN 48. FIN 48 clarifies the accounting for uncertainty in income taxes recognized in an enterprise’s financial statements in accordance with SFAS No. 109, “Accounting for Income Taxes”. This interpretation prescribes a recognition threshold and measurement attribute for the financial statement recognition and measurement of a tax position taken or expected to be taken in a tax return. FIN 48 also provides guidance on derecognition of tax benefits, classification on the balance sheet, interest and penalties, accounting in interim periods, disclosure, and transition. We adopted FIN 48 effective January 1, 2007. As a result of the implementation of FIN 48, we recorded a $4.5 million increase in the liability for unrecognized tax benefits which is included in Other Liabilities within the Company’s consolidated balance sheet. This increase in the liability resulted in a corresponding increase to the balance of accumulated deficit for the cumulative effect of this change. The total amount of federal, state, local and foreign unrecognized tax benefits was $4.7 million as of March 31, 2007, including accrued penalty and interest.

Recently Issued Accounting Standards

     In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157, Fair Value Measurements. SFAS No. 157 defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and expands disclosures about fair value measurements. SFAS No. 157 does not require any new fair value measurements; rather, it applies under other accounting pronouncements that require or permit fair value measurements. The provisions of SFAS No. 157 are to be applied prospectively as of the beginning of the fiscal year in which it is initially applied, with any transition adjustment recognized as a cumulative-effect adjustment to the opening balance of retained earnings. The provisions of SFAS No. 157 are effective for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007. We are currently evaluating the standard.

     In February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159, The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities , which provides companies with an option to report selected financial assets and liabilities at fair value. The objective of SFAS No. 159 is to reduce both complexity in accounting for financial instruments and the volatility in earnings caused by measuring related assets and liabilities differently. SFAS No. 159 also establishes presentation and disclosure requirements designed to facilitate comparisons between companies that choose different measurement attributes for similar types of assets and liabilities. SFAS No. 159 does not eliminate any disclosure requirements included in other accounting standards. We have not yet determined if we will elect to apply the options presented in SFAS No. 159, the earliest effective date that we can make such an election is January 1, 2008.

     We do not expect that our disclosure controls and procedures or our internal control over financial reporting will prevent or detect all errors and all fraud. A control system, no matter how well conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control systems are met. Further, the design of a control system must reflect the fact that there are resource constraints, and the benefits of controls must be considered relative to their costs. Because of the inherent limitations in a cost-effective control system, no evaluation of internal control over financial reporting can provide absolute assurance that misstatements due to error or fraud will not occur or that all control issues and instances of fraud, if any, within our company have been detected.

     These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty and that breakdowns can occur because of simple error or mistake. Controls can also be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more people, or by management override of the controls. The design of any system of controls is based in part on certain assumptions about the likelihood of future events, and there can be no assurance that any design will succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future conditions. Projections of any evaluation of controls effectiveness to future periods are subject to risks. Over time, controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions or deterioration in the degree of compliance with policies or procedures.

     Our management, with the participation of our CEO and CFO, evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures. Based on this evaluation, as of the end of the period covered by this Form 10-Q, our CEO and CFO have concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended) are effective.

     There has been no change in our internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act) during the quarter ended March 31, 2007 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.