alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

DAY HIGH

 348

 345

 347

 340

 340

 347

 343

 336

 338

 326

 321

 330

 328

 331

 333

 333

 341

 340

 341

 361

 352

 368

 367

 363

 364

 368

 370

 368

 373

 394

 319

 324

 317

 323

 324

 324

 325

 325

 319

 317

 313

 314

 314

 316

 322

 324

 321

 326

 321

 326

 330

 337

 342

 349

 348

 345

 331

 339

 326

 332

 331

 332

 330

 330

 330

 332

 329

 328

 326

 322

 318

 319

 320

 323

 327

 328

 329

 331

 328

 331

 339

 346

 349

 354

 356

 356

 355

 354

 355

 363

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

APRIL 2010 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: May 6, 2010

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

FARRAR PARK AT DUTCH SLOUGH
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

DAY HIGH

 385

 376

 370

 366

 360

 354

 348

 342

 341

 337

 326

 323

 326

 325

 325

 328

 326

 324

 322

 332

 330

 337

 348

 348

 348

 347

 344

 335

 356

 353

 345

 344

 339

 336

 330

 318

 308

 309

 305

 303

 301

 304

 300

 301

 303

 303

 299

 303

 302

 304

 308

 307

 305

 313

 301

 307

 370

 365

 360

 355

 351

 345

 341

 333

 328

 326

 315

 310

 311

 314

 313

 313

 313

 311

 310

 315

 315

 319

 325

 324

 323

 324

 321

 318

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

FEBRUARY 2018 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: March 1, 2018

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

HOLLAND TRACT ON OLD RIVER
**EXHIBIT 31.1****CERTIFICATIONS**I, Russell R. Roth, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Las Vegas Gaming, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial 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 misleadingwith respect to the period covered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respects thefinancial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issueras of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I are establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in the Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the small business issuerand have: a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, toensure that material information relating to the small business issuer,including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others withinthose entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  b. [Omitted];  c. Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the endof the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  d. Disclosed in this report any change in the small businessissuer’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during thesmall business issuer’s most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small businessissuer’s internal control over financial reporting; and5. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,based on our most recent evaluation, to the small business issuer’s auditors and theaudit committee of the small business issuer’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions): a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer’s ability torecord, process, summarize and report financial information; and  b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer’sinternal control over financial reporting.       Date:November 14, 2006 By: /s/  Russell R. Roth       Russell R. Roth, Chief Executive Officer  
24
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-7839
NICHOLAS WARNER JONES, a/k/a Charles Jones, Petitioner - Appellant, versus JAMES PEGUESE, Managing Warden; JOSEPH CURRAN, Attorney General of the State of Maryland, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District ofMaryland, at Baltimore. Benson E. Legg, Chief District Judge. (CA02-2968-L) Submitted: January 30, 2003 Decided: February 5, 2003 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Nicholas Warner Jones, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Nicholas Warner Jones seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing without prejudice, and as successive, his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a habeas corpus proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). When, as here, a district court dismisses a § 2254 petition solely on procedural grounds, a certificate of appealability will not issue unless the petitioner can demonstrate both "(1) ‘that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the petition states a valid claim of the denial of a constitutional right’ and (2) ‘that jurists of reason would find it debatable whether the district court was correct in its procedural ruling.’" Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 684 (4th Cir.) (quoting Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)), cert. denied , 122 S. Ct. 318 (2001). We have reviewed the record and conclude for the reasons stated by the district court that Jones has not made the requisite showing. See Jones v. Peguese , No. CA-02-2968-L (D. Md. filed Sept. 17, 2002 & entered Sept. 18, 2002). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are3 adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 5233 

To extend the temporary scheduling order issued by Administrator of the 

Drug Enforcement Administration to schedule fentanyl-related substances 

under the Controlled Substances Act. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 21, 2019 

Mr. FITZPATRICK (for himself and Ms. KUSTER of New Hampshire) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy 

and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for 

a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for 

consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To extend the temporary scheduling order issued by Administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration to schedule fentanyl-related substances under the Controlled Substances Act. 

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 ‘‘Extend Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•HR 5233 IH

1 SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF TEMPORARY SCHEDULING ORDER 

2 OF FENTANYL-RELATED SUBSTANCES IN 

3 SCHEDULE I. 

4 The temporary scheduling order issued by Adminis5 trator of the Drug Enforcement Administration to sched6 ule fentanyl-related substances in schedule I of section 

7 202(c) of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 

8 812(c)) and published in the Federal Register on Feb9 ruary 6, 2018 (83 Fed. Reg. 5188), is deemed to be ex10 tended until February 6, 2022. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
COMMENTS: Values in Acre-Feet

Day

Elev

Feet Storage Change

Federal

Pump

Federal

Gen

Pacheco

Pump ADJ

Federal

Change

Federal

Storage

32,862

1 385.57 412,940 -5,990 0 3,787 238 0 -4,027 28,835

2 384.76 407,054 -5,886 0 3,815 295 0 -4,073 24,762

3 383.43 397,456 -9,598 0 5,773 311 0 -6,985 17,777

4 382.50 390,795 -6,661 0 3,882 296 0 -4,101 13,676

5 381.78 385,666 -5,129 0 2,926 274 0 -3,290 10,386

6 380.84 379,007 -6,659 0 3,919 303 0 -4,148 6,238

7 380.05 373,443 -5,564 0 3,943 293 0 -4,095 2,143

8 379.35 368,538 -4,905 0 2,803 256 0 -3,085 -942

9 378.64 363,587 -4,951 0 2,844 297 0 -3,171 -4,113

10 377.83 357,969 -5,618 0 4,769 272 0 -4,981 -9,094

11 377.18 353,483 -4,486 0 2,395 284 0 -2,713 -11,807

12 376.43 348,332 -5,151 0 0 276 0 -227 -12,034

13 375.56 342,218 -6,114 0 0 282 0 -444 -12,478

14 374.84 337,377 -4,841 0 0 252 0 -177 -12,655

15 374.53 335,300 -2,077 0 940 240 0 -1,191 -13,846

16 374.18 332,960 -2,340 0 900 206 0 -1,225 -15,071

17 373.87 330,893 -2,067 0 1,842 200 0 -2,061 -17,132

18 373.03 325,314 -5,579 0 903 184 0 -1,046 -18,178

19 372.06 318,914 -6,400 0 2,263 266 0 -2,431 -20,609

20 371.26 313,669 -5,245 0 0 276 0 -323 -20,932

21 370.52 308,846 -4,823 0 0 289 0 -259 -21,191

22 370.05 305,797 -3,049 0 0 277 0 -319 -21,510

23 369.57 302,694 -3,103 0 0 298 0 -343 -21,853

24 369.09 299,603 -3,091 0 0 296 0 -349 -22,202

25 368.46 295,563 -4,040 0 0 301 0 -283 -22,485

26 367.73 290,908 -4,655 0 0 310 25,000 24,722 2,237

27 367.24 287,799 -3,109 0 0 275 25,000 24,785 27,022

28 366.76 284,765 -3,034 0 0 267 0 -325 26,697

29 366.29 281,806 -2,959 0 0 258 0 -286 26,411

30 365.84 278,984 -2,822 0 0 288 0 -241 26,170

31 365.23 275,176 -3,808 0 924 408 0 -1,282 24,888

Totals -143,754 0 48,628 8,568 50,000 -7,974

Historical Archive and Report Database

San Luis Reservoir Federal 

Daily Operations

August 2021 Run Date: 9/25/2023
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

October 12, 2020

No. 04-20-00429-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF Y.Z., N.A.Z., J.F.Z., AND V.V.Z., CHILDREN

From the County Court at Law, Val Verde County, Texas

Trial Court No. 3814CCL

Honorable Sergio J. Gonzalez, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

This is an accelerated appeal of the trial court’s order terminating appellant’s parental 

rights. Appellant’s brief was originally due to be filed on October 12, 2020.1 On October 9, 

2020, appellant filed a motion requesting an extension of time until October 23, 2020 to file the 

brief.

The disposition of this appeal is governed by the standards set forth in Rule 6.2 of the 

Texas Rules of Judicial Administration. TEX. R. JUD. ADMIN. 6.2. Accordingly, this appeal is 

required to be brought to final disposition within 180 days of the date the notice of appeal is 

filed. Id. 

The motion is GRANTED, and appellant’s brief must be filed no later than October 23, 

2020. Given the time constraints governing the disposition of this appeal, further requests for 

extensions of time will be disfavored.

_________________________________

Beth Watkins, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 12th day of October, 2020.

1 Appellant’s motion states her brief is due on Tuesday, October 13, 2020, due to “a Monday holiday (Columbus 

Day).” However, neither the State of Texas nor Bexar County recognizes Columbus Day as a “legal holiday,” and 

this court is open for business that day. See TEX. R. APP. P. 44.1(a) (extending appellate deadlines that fall on “a 

legal holiday”).
___________________________________

Michael A. Cruz, 

Clerk of Court
#### John Gann, Respondent, v. Guy A. Sharp, Appellant.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. All concurred.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY HIGH

 759

 769

 793

 810

 867

 868

 888

 939

 946

 950

 992

 914

 973

 861

 923

 919

 966

 880

 899

 951

 998

 961

 923

 1,002

 846

 801

 851

 822

 881

 896

 839

 613

 647

 660

 668

 680

 685

 683

 694

 703

 707

 719

 723

 775

 762

 761

 780

 784

 787

 782

 783

 783

 789

 788

 753

 754

 736

 658

 639

 602

 577

 521

 663

 693

 710

 724

 746

 737

 744

 764

 768

 769

 818

 835

 818

 810

 815

 829

 851

 823

 819

 831

 835

 842

 822

 808

 786

 762

 747

 715

 701

 700

 686

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

OCTOBER 2021 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: January 27, 2022

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

HOLLAND TRACT ON OLD RIVER
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8 Nos. 333-143652, 333-61876 and 333-153228) pertaining to the 2000
Long-Term Incentive Plan, the 2006 Equity Incentive Plan, and certain warrants,
of our reports dated March 16, 2009 to the consolidated financial statements and
schedule of RadNet, Inc. and subsidiaries, and the effectiveness of internal
control over financial reporting of RadNet, Inc., included in this Annual Report
(Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2008.




                                                           /s/ Ernst & Young LLP
                                                           ---------------------


Los Angeles, California
 March 16, 2009
### Part B—Assistance To Provide Basic Skills Improvement
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
 
 FORM 8-K
 CURRENT REPORT PURSUANT
TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
 
 Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported) June 22, 2011
 NeuStar, Inc.
  Delaware
    
    001-32548
    
    52-2141938(State or other jurisdiction
    
    (Commission
    
    (IRS EmployerOf incorporation)
    
    File Number)
    
    Identification No.)
 21575 Ridgetop CircleSterling, Virginia
    
    20166(Address of principal executive offices)
    
    (Zip Code)
 (571) 434-5400
  N/A
   o
 o
 o
 o




---



##### 



Item 5.07. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders.
  1.
    
    The nominees for election to the Board of Directors as Class I directors were elected to
serve until the 2014 Annual Meeting of Stockholders and until their respective successors have
been elected or appointed, based upon the following votes:
 Name of Nominee
    
    For
    
    Against
    
    Abstentions
    
    Broker Non-VotesJames G. Cullen
    
    
    60,964,782
    
    
    
    304,639
    
    
    
    64,366
    
    
    
    2,159,336Joel P. Friedman
    
    
    60,983,476
    
    
    
    302,957
    
    
    
    47,354
    
    
    
    2,159,336
 2.
    
    The proposal to ratify the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as the Companys independent
registered public accounting firm for 2011 was approved based upon the following votes:
 Votes for approval:
    
    
    63,240,957Votes against:
    
    
    243,746Abstentions:
    
    
    8,420
  3.
    
    The proposal to approve, on an advisory basis, the compensation paid to the Companys named
executive officers was approved based upon the following votes:
 Votes for approval:
    
    
    57,319,489Votes against:
    
    
    2,207,783Abstentions:
    
    
    1,806,515Broker non-votes:
    
    
    2,159,336
 4.
    
    The stockholders voted, on an advisory basis, that future advisory votes to approve the
compensation paid to the Companys named executive officers should be held as follows:
 Every one year:
    
    
    53,612,575Every two years:
    
    
    2,214,395Every three years:
    
    
    3,732,524Abstentions:
    
    
    1,774,293Broker non-votes:
    
    
    2,159,336
  2




---



##### 



SIGNATURES
  Date: June 28, 2011
    NEUSTAR, INC.By:
    /s/ Lisa A. HookName:
    Lisa A. HookTitle:
    President and Chief Executive Officer 3
### SUBCHAPTER IV—GENERAL
1 ... S eeTe x. R. App . P. 47. 4. 

## COURT OF APPEALS SECOND DISTRICTOFTEXAS FORT WORTH NO. 2 - 08 - 39 5- CV R OYC E HOME S - DAL L AS , L . P . AP P E L L ANT V . H A RM O N RO A D / 287 PA RTN ERS, L. P. A PPELL EE

----- ----- FR O M THE 9 6TH DI STRI CT CO URT O F TARRA NT CO UN TY

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

### M E M ORANDU M OP I NI ON 1 

### AND J UDGME NT

----- ----- -- O n O c t o b e r7 , 2 0 0 8 a n d O c t o b e r2 2 , 2 0 0 8 , w e n o t if ie d a p p e lla n t , in a c c o r d a n c e w it h r u le o f a p p e lla t e p r o c e d u r e 4 2 .3 (c ), t h a t w e w o u ld d is m is s t h is a p p e a l u n l e s s t h e $ 1 7 5 fi l i n g fe e w a s p a i d . S eeT e x . R . A p p . P . 4 2 .3 (c ). A p p e l l a n t h a s n o t p a i d th e $ 1 7 5 fi l i n g fe e . S eeT e x . R . A p p . P . 5 , 1 2 .1 (b ).2 ... S eeS u p re m e C o u rt o f T e x ., O rde r R eg a rd in g Fe e s Ch a r

g e d i n C ivil Cases i n the S uprem e C our tand the C our ts of A ppeal s and Before the Judi ci al Pa n e l o n Multi

d i s tr i c tL iti g a tion , M i s c . Doc k e t No. 07- 9138 ( Aug. 28, 2007 ) (l i s ti n g fe e s i n c o u rts o f a p p e a l s ). 2 Beca us e app el l ant has f ai l ed t o com pl y w i t h a r equ i r em entoft he r ul es of a pp e l l a t e p r oc e du r e a nd t he Te xa s Su pr e m e Cou r t ’ s o r de ro f Aug us t 28, 2007 , 2 w e d i s m i s s th e a p p e a l . S eeT e x . R . A p p . P . 4 2 .3 (c ), 4 3 .2 (f). A ppel l ant shal l pay al l cost s of t hi s appeal , f orw hi ch l et execut i on i ssue. S eeTe x. R. App . P. 43. 4.

P E R CU R I AM PA N EL: M C C O Y, J. ; CA YC E, C. J. ; an d L I V I N G STO N , J. DEL I VERE D: Nov e m be r20, 2008
TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 10-1102 

________________________________________________________________________ 

NUCLEAR SAFETY 

 Agreement Between the 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and the EUROPEAN ATOMIC ENERGY 

COMMUNITY 

Signed at Vienna November 2, 2010 

with 

Annexes 
 NOTE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

 Pursuant to Public Law 89—497, approved July 8, 1966 

(80 Stat. 271; 1 U.S.C. 113)—

“. . .the Treaties and Other International Acts Series issued 

under the authority of the Secretary of State shall be competent 

 evidence . . . of the treaties, international agreements other than 

treaties, and proclamations by the President of such treaties and 

international agreements other than treaties, as the case may be, 

therein contained, in all the courts of law and equity and of maritime 

jurisdiction, and in all the tribunals and public offices of the 

United States, and of the several States, without any further proof 

or authentication thereof.” 
EUROPEAN ATOMIC ENERGY COMMUNITY 

Nuclear Safety 

 Agreement signed at Vienna November 2, 2010; 

 Entered into force November 2, 2010. 

 With annexes.
#### § 24.191 Segregation of operations.

Where more than one process of producing effervescent wine is used, the appropriate TTB officer may require the portion of the premises used for the production and storage of wine made by each process (bottle fermenting, bulk fermenting, or injecting carbon dioxide) to be segregated as provided by § 24.27.

(Sec. 201, Pub. L. 85-859, 72 Stat. 1381, as amended (26 U.S.C. 5365))

[T.D. TTB-147, 82 FR 7663, Jan. 23, 2017]
#### Anthony Gessling, Appellant, v. 52 E. 120th Street Corp., Respondent.

Order unanimously affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements. No opinion. Present — Peck, P. J., Glennon, Cohn, Van Voorhis and Shientag, JJ.
###### Editorial Note on Part 26

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 26 appear by T.D. ATF-451, 66 FR 21668, 21669, May 1, 2001.

#### § 26.69 Strengthening bonds.

In all cases where the penal sum of any bond becomes insufficient, the principal shall either give a strengthening bond with the same surety to attain a sufficient penal sum, or give a new bond to cover the entire liability. Strengthening bonds will not be approved where any notation is made thereon which is intended, or which may be construed, as a release of any former bond, or as limiting the amount of any bond to less than its full penal sum. Strengthening bonds shall show the current date of execution and the effective date.
#### § 24.100 General.

Each person desiring to conduct operations in wine production, as specified in § 24.101(b), (other than the production of wine free of tax as provided in §§ 24.75 through 24.77) shall, prior to commencing operations, establish wine premises, make application as provided in § 24.105, file any required bond, and receive permission to operate wine premises as provided in this part. After approval, the wine premises will be designated a bonded winery, bonded wine cellar or taxpaid wine bottling house. As provided in § 24.107, the designated bonded winery will be used if production operations are to be conducted. In addition, wine premises may be used, in accordance with the provisions of this part, for the conduct of certain other operations.

(Sec. 201, Pub. L. 85-859, 72 Stat. 1378, as amended (26 U.S.C. 5351, 5352))

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 1512-0058)

[T.D. ATF-299, 55 FR 24989, June 19, 1990, as amended by T.D. ATF-409, 64 FR 13684, Mar. 22, 1999; T.D. TTB-146, 82 FR 1123, Jan. 4, 2017]
EXHIBIT32

 

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO

18U.S.C. SECTION1350,

ASADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of Your Domain.Com (the"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2004, asfiled with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the"Report"), I, Anthony N. DeMint, President and Chief AccountingOfficer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

-  The    Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the    Securities Exchange Act of 1934; andThe    information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material    respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

/s/Anthony N.DeMint                       

AnthonyN. DeMint

Presidentand Chief Accounting Officer

May 13,2004